skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Several points:

1) "Foundations of Physics" is closer to a philosophy journal than a physics journal. It's full of fascinating stuff, but it's far more speculative than any other legitimate journal. When libraries were cutting budgets in the '80's and '90's it was generally the first to go.

2) When highly theoretical phenomena are talked about in engineering terms, the odds of confirmation bias are huge. Who wouldn't want a reactionless-ish thruster?

3) Measuring transient forces of the kind being applied here is extremely hard, and the number of confounding factors is extremely large. The article mentions a mu-metal shield, which will screen some of the Earth's magnetic field from the apparatus but which is useless for screening transient magnetic fields, which get generated by transient electric fields thanks to the magic of Maxwell. Ampere's law tells us CurlB = mu_0epsilon_0dE/dt. So the possibility of residual electro-magnetic forces is non-trivial to say the least, particularly in a room full of conductors and time-varying EM-fields (from the wiring, the pump, etc).

Putting the whole apparatus in a Faraday cage would help, but the history of measuring small (and transient) forces in physics in the past couple of decades (the fifth force mess, Joe Weber's coherent neutrino scattering work) argues that we take these experimental measurements with a large grain of salt, unless they can be shown to be in precise numerical agreement with the theory's predictions over an order of magnitude variation in power input and rate of variation.

The theory may not be wrong, but it needs a lot more experimental investigation and likely theoretical examination as well. Theorists tend not to spend a lot of time critiquing things that look really likely to be wrong, because proving something that everyone thinks is probably wrong, wrong can be incredibly time-consuming and utterly unrewarding. So the lack of theoretical disproof is not very compelling. So far as I know Joe Weber's coherent scattering theory was never dis-proven in publication, either: it was mostly dismissed by informal but compelling arguments at conferences (the best one was simply that there was nothing special about neutrinos in Weber's theory, so if what he said was correct single crystals would coherently scatter x-rays in exactly the same way, which would have shown up as an anomalous low-energy contribution to EM cross-sections that would have been an obvious problem for decades if anyone had observed it.)
So quick question to anyone who's used this lib. The README cites an example: it can give you the date for text like: '1 min ago', '2 weeks ago', '3 months, 1 weeks and 1 day ago', etc

Does it handle proper grammar for singular values (i.e., 1 week vs. 1 weeks)?
It's possible that they only log edits/deletes for enterprise customers with this feature enabled.
This book is great, it is very upfront that javascript has significant limitations if you're interested in functional programming. But, I think it lays out a great way to write much cleaner javascript code and ways to avoid mutability. There are tons of great functions that Michael writes in the book and would be very useful if not only as a set of utility functions alongside underscore.
Interesting take, and I think I see your point with that clarification of your view of stages of thought. I don't share that concept of the progression of ideas, nor do I feel the need to make the distinction between science and pre science.

I do think that much of what humans do is ascientific. But Jessica's examination of founders, esp via a structured interview, is not in this category.
Instructions that trigger a CPU interrupt, or other means of handing control back to the OS, are used for single-stepping at the source level, yes.

I think "hack" is a little too strong a word. CPUs, historically, have had too little state to usefully track all the execution breakpoints you might want to set. So they normally have a nice short instruction that the OS can trap. On x86, it's INT 3, aka interrupt 3, encoded in a single byte, 0xCC. Interrupts are handled by entries in the interrupt vector table (IVT), normally in a region of memory only the OS can write to (if you're not doing something like running DOS in real mode). So when the CPU tries to execute 0xCC, it instead calls code located in the fourth entry (3 counted from 0) in the IVT. This will be filled by the OS, for modern values of OS.

(Single stepping CPU instructions is done with mode flags on the CPU for x86; this let's the CPU single-step things like REPNZ prefix used with string instructions).
This, this, this, all the way this. The first step on treating someone equal is actually accepting it as equal; if it is equal then, why would you need to highlight a difference?

Most of the whiteknighting I see here comes from a very distorted (if not pathological) portrait of "how should a person that does not discriminate behave". Sadly, but true, sometimes the people that believe they are being the most helpful actually aggravate the problem even more.

I remember an interview to a female programmer not long ago where the interviewer started asking bullshit questions like in "is it hard to be a woman in a world full of man". The girl became really pissed off (of course) and eventually told the guy to stop asking things around that topic, she was there because she was a skilled programmer which is a skill irrelevant to the fact of someone being male/female black/white muslim/catholic or whatever. But obviously those stories are not attractive for media/PR, the best selling show is instead called "I'm a <relative minority> and can STILL do the same stuff as if <status quo> would've done it!". A shame to see YC falling for the same fad.
Going on a depressing tangent, this is also why I worry about municipalities running internet. Then again I highly doubt that either Comcast, Verizon, or Time Warner actually reject any requests from Unc Sam
an upload feature would be stellar.
Lawsuits are incredibly painful. The emotional and time tax to be in one, regardless of what side you are on, is immense.

I hear what this guy is saying. However, having been in three lawsuits, one of which I initiated, I would do the same thing as Slack. I would generally try to do anything reasonable I could to avoid a lawsuit.

Arbitration or mediation (very different things) is almost always required anyways, by the courts, if you file a lawsuit. They make you try. At least they try to force a mediator.

If you force arbitration, it's the same thing as forcing a lawsuit and would result in my immediate desire to resolve your issue without continued legal maneuvers.

Anecdotally, and as I think most litigation attorneys would tell you -- People settle lawsuits because they are either out of time, or money. They almost never settle because they think they've lost the case. The merits of the case rarely matter once you are knee-deep in the litigation, but the toll a lawsuit takes does factor into a settlement decision quite often.
iOS 8.1.1 jailbreak with pangu download
Announcing the AcousticBrainz project
Legally, I like the fact that my employer can pull up all my communications. If there are any HR-level disputes between employees, just pull up the record and look.

This isn't necessarily what I want from a personal service, though.
It's hard to justify not putting a mandatory arbitration clause into a contract, even if it is unethical. It's an incredible boon for companies and most users don't appreciate what they're losing.
In the beginning there was the command line (1999) is the best I know http://faculty.georgetown.edu/irvinem/theory/Stephenson-Comm...

Happy to hear suggestions of others- I haven't found much and haven't looked lately.
What's the problem? Send these guys a private offer to arbitrate, according to your terms. Put your concerns on an affidavit concluded with your offer, and give them an opportunity to respond within 10-15 days. If they go silent (they will), send a notice of default next, and then file your lawsuit in civil court. You will have satisfied the private arbitration clause (arbitration went nowhere), and with your options exhausted, you now must file in court.

Source: I'm an ex aequo et bono arbitrator.
They're holding our chats hostage, we can't even look at our chat history without accepting the terms. And to think that we chose Slack over HipChat solely for their better ToS. This makes no sense at all, why would you force something like this onto your customers so aggressively? They're killing all of their good will with us in one fell swoop.
I did read it, and I thought it doesn't even deserve to be called journalism. They only reference people currently going through the immigration process, and employers. What do you think their perspective is going to be? They even included a quote from an employer claiming that he hires 10 Americans for every immigrant, without any quantification, clarification or investigation, let alone analysis on whether or not that is common for technology firms (it isn't). For all we know, all 10 hired people don't make a combined salary of the single imported worker. They then left an unsourced quote as the very last line of the article claiming that the new measure would not in any way be related to wage suppression.

When I worked for actual worker's rights, in another lifetime, whenever a PR firm hired out journalists to write a hit piece on our organization they would write articles of this quality. Selectively choosing interviewees to meet a predefined viewpoint, skipping over flashpoint words, presenting only one viewpoint without analysis, and then as a buried lead, dismiss potential opposition worries as far below the fold as possible.
The answer to the whitespace debate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_languag...
My thoughts exactly. Why don't they crowdfund this? For about $200k they could probably stick a prototype on a nanosat and just hit go. With the right tracking equipment the results should be pretty conclusive.
Thats basically what they described isn't it? This compliance export feature is the only thing that allows reading private messages, and it is disabled by default and requires significant hoop-jumping to enable. So for most companies the original privacy policy will apply effectively.
What I don't understand is why not have this be "opt-in". Meaning if your company does not need this feature for real legal reasons they don't enable it and everyone is happy. I've heard a few people saying they did not want this feature in Hipchat and would have to switch to make sure there team was not suspicious. If my company never needs to access private chats for legal reasons, there is no reason it should be enabled today and they can have access to it in 3 years.

I understand specific companies have specific needs and Slack has to meet some of these but there is no reason that this should impact everyone else.
So many pseudoscience articles today! We got one about solving NP complete problems in polynomial time with a new kind of "brain-like" computer, and now there's one about violating conservation of momentum. Next up: Peano arithmetic is inconsistent & telepathy proven to work based on quantum mechanics.
I didn't say unimportant. I said it is interesting, but no reason to panic (well, maybe a reason for the kernel to panic, but you and me probably shouldn't).
Given the hassles with getting electronic systems to respond cleanly all the way down to DC, I'd say this sounds more like a hardware-implementation of the known polynomial-time approximate method:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subset_sum_problem#Polynomial_t...
Google Cloud Messaging (GCM): An Evaluation
Hi foxpc- that is a hard question to answer without knowing more specifics. Here are some of the questions that I can use to point you in the right direction.

- What kind of site(s) do you have traffic for?

- Are they in a specific niche, or is the traffic more general?

- Which ad units do you support?

- What is your estimated volume (impressions/month)?

- What is your geo breakdown?

Feel free to reach out to me directly if you don't want to share this info publicly. I would love to help!
You Don't Need VC Money to Build a Great Product
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=language+learning+rates+...

It's well documented that the median language-learning speed/ability of younger people is greater than that of older people.
Did you read the article? It explains a very thorough opt-in process which involves mailing a signed letter on company letterhead and manual reviewal.
Isomorphic JS is only going to get bigger. Writing browser-friendly modules in CommonJS is an admirable strategy, especially since you're trying to avoid requiring your own custom build system.

I use Webpack (similar to Browserify, but I understand Webpack's more powerful), and I can't imagine starting a new JS project without it.
Any employee is a fool for thinking making permanent records of things using company resources will remain private.

You're on holiday or otherwise unavailable and someone needs some details for some obscure project you're working on? Crack open their email!

Those accounts and everything else belong to your employer and if it suits their purposes to go poking around your email or IMs, then they will.
It is amazing that you chose to post this carto as it is the one I spent the most time on. Check out http://nerd.nu/maps/pve11/#/1610/64/-699/-1/0/0

If I remember correctly I built that floating island to hide my underwater base from the carto. I should load it up and wander around. Which rev is it?
Thanks glibgil.

triangleman, I'm not sure why I was hellbanned. After 100+ days of lurking and a handful posts/comments, I decided today to start trying to start participating again. My comment history is pretty vanilla, with one random link that I don't remember even posting on the Uber article and didn't even make any sense in the context of the article.

Also, there was never a deleted offensive comment on my account, so I'm not sure why I would be hell-banned. Is there anything I can do to reverse this?
That can't be true, can it? The population of the state ~19 million and the population of NYC is ~8.5 million.
Oh, sorry.. I understand that. My real question was for those of us on standard plans is hard-deletion a thing, and has it ever been in the past.

In fact, even for folks on plans this covers it's not clear how much of this is "backwards compatible" with regard to data and conversations in Slack prior to these terms.

[Edit: actually I see now "Compliance Exports are not retroactive and do not apply to past private conversations before the feature is enabled" so strike the second paragraph.]
Cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:7WmF1rm...
After seeing that Facebook's Flow tool was written with an OCaml parser, I was quite impressed by the beauty of its syntax. It makes functional programming feel much less intimidating, compared to Haskell or a Lisp in my opinion, and I can see the parallels to F#. Thanks for sharing this introduction, it was very apropos for me!
Phabricator, Wikimedia’s new collaboration platform
I'm with you on the Washington plate. The Space Needle is emblematic of Seattle, which is great for things that are for Seattle. But the Washington license plate is for the entire state, and even though I grew up not too far from Seattle, there's a lot more to the state than just one city. Mt. Rainier is something that's emblematic of the entire state.
It would be interesting to look at those nations, such as Israel, where more women become programmers, and look to see if an early start is a factor there. I would guess that institutional forces are at work at a later age, in particular the willingness of the schools and the military to push math/computers to anyone who seems to have ability. Which is to say, I doubt that starting early is a factor. What matters is what sort of environment the women face when they get done with school.
I'm always worried when I see sentences with the structure "It's hard to justify [doing/not doing] X even if it's [unethical/illegal]". What type of justification do you need?
Maybe I missed it, but no case was given.
He didn't spend 10 years proving 1+1=2. He spent 10 years constructing an axiomatic system in which arithmetic and everything else could be proved.
Absolutely false. We have a large number of machine-checked proof that are 100% "filled in".

As a trivial example that a fair number of CS people might have been exposed to: every time someone compiles an Agda program, the compiler does a complete formal proof that the program is total and terminating.
> why complain

Because it offers a non-zero chance of the best outcome: a low cost, high benefit outcome where the world changes to fall in line with your expectations. If you do not say anything then the world has little chance of changing. It is a rational result of cost benefit analysis. (Consider that moving to another service is costly, and building a new one more costly still.)

Additionally, I would point out that complaining about things that we don't like is a universal human trait, which you yourself demonstrate. :)
To say nothing of the fact that large companies are not agreeing to these terms, they will have custom MSAs which dictate jurisdiction, etc.
You don't need a car if you live in NYC, but you do need a car if you're outside the city.
The source, by itself, without all the themes, is about one MB

That's just the basics. You still need to override/add more. 1MB to get you out of the gate is appalling.
That's the experiment :)

Radiolab is really an experimental way of doing audio. Jad is a composer and they break all the traditional rules to make it very immersive. Personally, I like it. But, I also like the virtually no production, talk podcasts too.
What does the "national prevailing wage" have to do with the "prevailing wage for a software developer in SF", which is what I was talking about? San Francisco is a tiny city, and I am only talking about San Francisco since that is where the job I linked to is located.
If anyone needs help drafting TOS/Privacy Policy to include OR NOT mandatory arbitration check out UpCounsel's black friday special. You can work with an attorney to customize your legal documents to your use case. This is exactly why legal documents are not cookie cuter forms. https://www.upcounsel.com/black-friday

-Disclaimer: I work at UpCounsel
"When highly theoretical phenomena are talked about in engineering terms"

That may be true, but you also mention that measuring tiny transient forces is incredibly hard. Thus, the only way to actually get an accurate measurement for this thing is to attempt to scale it up until the force is either unambiguous or the confounding culprit can be found. You've got to try to amplify the signal.

I also don't get the impression that these folks are dummies. I'd be surprised if they haven't done experiments to attempt to rule out electromagnetic effects. Simple ones would involve moving stuff around, doing this in the presence of various magnetic fields imposed by outside sources to see if the underlying effect is still there, etc.

Edit: some more info here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect#Test_devices

In particular:

"In 2004, Paul March of Lockheed Martin Space Operations, who started working in this research field as of 1998, presented successful replication of Woodward's previous experiments at STAIF."

There are a few other less conclusive attempts at replication, but only one claimed negative result. But as you say, measuring forces this tiny is hard.
Well, the author's point is probably still generally correct - in almost all fields proofs are not presented from axioms, and you could easily go your whole life as a mathematician without encountering such a proof, except perhaps by accident.

His point was that formal proofs are "hypothetical", not that they are rarely encountered. What part of

> The trouble is, no one has ever carried out that filling-in process. It’s purely hypothetical.

don't you understand?

I'm currently writing my undergraduate project in a proof assistant, and you end up with tonnes of unreadable garbage like ASM_SIMP_TAC (srw_ss ()) [DETERMINACY_LEMMA, simp_expand_def] THEN1 METIS_TAC [] THEN RW_TAC (srw_ss ()) [ss_ecases] THEN FULL_SIMP_TAC (srw_ss ()) []. which has no real relation to any normal thought.

The syntax you describe bears very little relation to formal system like Metamath in which proofs are readily checkable by people and machines.

I also think that his line
(it almost certainly is not, but more pertinent, how could you ever be sure it is?)
is still a good point - you're trusting your correctness to a computer program, and all of the libraries built on top of it.

No. Metamath proofs can easily be verified by hand.
Agreed. A focus on gender is warranted, but not to the exclusion of other demographics. There are likely a great many large startups waiting to be built in each under-represented demographic. These startups aren't yet built because not enough domain experts have the technical ability and startup knowledge they need to build them. Which, I believe, is YC and 500's business rationale for encouraging diversity.
Do you know if VMs like the JVM depend on hardware features also? I suspect that would be more an optimization, not a necessity though, since they should be able to de-optimize jitted native code on stack frames containing breakpoints?
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. What I mean is that if in 3 years my company needs to have access to some logs, they will have to go through the multi-steps process but then have access to whatever they need (starting from today's logs)

What I meant was that the possibility to access private chats should stay not retroactive and only happen once the company has explicitly stated it will need this feature enabled.

EDIT: so that if my company has no legal needs today it won't have access to private chats made today once they decide in the future that they now need the feature
Hey, thanks. Yah I kind've knew about this, and never got back to it. What do you think I should put in index.js?

I was thinking `throw new Error('You're doing it wrong');` :-P
Very cool! I started thinking in Octal again a bit while reading this...
Close to none. Part of that is a social problem. People who do computer assisted proofs are not particularly well regarded, in my experience.

Another big issue with those tools is that they don't work as well for analysis as they do for algebraic geometry and graph theory. This might be in part due to the fact that most of the folks constructing them are logicians, not analysts.
Consider the metric of "damage done by the workaround."

Smart Pointers: have to put explicit refcounting in the root "Object" class

Concurrency Primitives: dependency on the POSIX API and its various "ports."

Type deducion: a few extra keystrokes, a bit of extra ugliness.

Reflection: Duplicate all ivar definitions in several places (if you control all the code) / create a new C++ parser (!) in order to add the feature to the language (if you don't). Also, you have to learn a new MOS every time you work on a different application. Interfacing two MOSes is always a nightmare.
Depending on where you work, you might have a lot of emails or less emails. But zero emails is, from my perspective, impossible to achieve - as of today.