skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the reasoning behind why some companies are staying privately-traded (e.g. Epic Systems) with some success. It makes it hard to raise money, but gives more control over executive management and company direction.

It's also why the B-Corp is becoming increasingly popular, as it can shield management against being sued for not profit maximizing.
Using a Scalable Bootstrap to Get Error Bounds on Classification Metrics
The concept goes beyond the current shareholders too. In order to drive the stock price up, the company has to align itself towards the group of outside investors with the largest amount of capital.
Orion: Uncertainty ahead for new US spaceship
I always buy my books from amazon. You should try them out.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=as_li_qf_sp_sr_tl?ie=UTF...
I think the state should ease his mind on that score by taking the access path by emininent domain.
Similar issue with Firefox/Android, the Lena BPG images are completely scrambled to hell.

Safari/iOS and Chrome/Android worked with no issue. Desktop Firefox also worked.
This choice doesn't exist.

The market is not 100% efficient, but it's not extremely far from it either.

Share prices are not something you can 'grow'. The company's future prospects change, and that affects share prices. If the companies will start targeting B, then the market will (very quickly) learn that this doesn't work (i.e. lot of people lose their money because they buy close to the top), and then share prices won't increase.

Person A, B, C don't exist in isolation. C _is_ concerned by share price growth because growing share price still means (despite all the bullshit people read and believe about investing) that the expected future dividends will increase. Person B _does_ care about long-term prospects because he's not the only smart guy in the town and if the company is doomed in the long run then chances are somebody else will sell before B sells. Person A _does_ care about short-term growth -- again because he's not the smartest all the time therefore if the share price drops today then it's usually a good signal about the prospects of tomorrow (I hope nobody argues with that -- if one does, then he's free to make a fortune on the stockmarket...).

D and E is a completely separate story.
Im all for questioning assumptions. But i dont see him put forward a clear alternative.

And he is comparing change in stock prices based on corporate mantras. He doesnt even adjust for industry, or compare to the overall market during that time. That makes no sense, why is this #1.
yes we do.

but like most people who are enraged by the lack of accountability at the top, i feel powerless to do anything about it. except maybe bitch about it on sites like hn, but what good does that do... other than to get you flagged as a rabble rouser or banished from sight/site.

i looked at the map but before i start agreeing and critiquing, what are we supposed to be doing here. sure i understand the endpoint, but it feels out of context. i'm not sure how to use or follow it? can you give us a walk though?
Media misrepresentation of science does not invalidate science. What about milk, or vitamins or stretching?
These are pretty air planes, why are they called ugly?
Uber vs. Portland
B promotes the bubble/burst-cycle. It is an endemic possibly extrinsic motivator in the business culture now. When did it begin?
In case you missed it, the name of the group is Guardians of Peace, whose initials are G.O.P. These guys are comedians, too.
"Power consumption really needs time-of-day based metering on it so that power consumed during peak hours is more expensive than off-peak hours, to give incentives to better even out the load."

I was under the impression that something like this was already in-place.

http://news-archives.solarenergy-usa.com/2013/09/utilities-o...

Maybe it's not very widespread.
>Varnish is an engineering masterpiece

No, it isn't. That's very much the point. They have spent all this time realizing that doing it wrong is bad and rewriting it to actually work.

>do you have any data to prove this?

No, that was 2 jobs ago. I'm sure you can get a hold of the source code of old varnish and test it out yourself.
No, in the security community, crackers are those who defeat software protection. Hackers hack into computers.
Delhi Woman Raped, Allegedly by Uber Taxi Driver, He's Missing
Me too. I love the A-10 itself and the concept. I've talked to a number of people who said that when they heard the A-10s coming in, they knew help was close. That's awe-inspiring for me.
Alchemist v0.9.0 Release – Elixir Tooling Emacs Integration
If 1) having your definition of value dictated is a bad thing and 2) selling equity equals having your definition of value dictated then 3) selling equity is a bad thing.

I believe 1) is mostly true but 2) is not necessarily true and especially should not be true.
That 'strategy' quote is a far more intelligent than the title quote. It completely and concisely sums up the correct argument in 8 words, and it does it better than the paper linked.
This question was tackled a while back by, of all people, John McCarthy (AI pioneer and creator of Lisp). You can find his analysis here:

http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/arithmetic.html
This was a great book about highly inspirational men. I have the letters OODA on my white board as a reminder of his strategies. I also note that several of his Acolytes still write a number of editorials in attempts to curb gross errors in defense planning.
> It does represent the will of the people.

So you're saying the UK government held a vote asking "Do you want to be surveilled?" and a majority of citizens answered in the affirmative? I can't remember anything like that happening here in the US.
"when you focus on your users, financial success follows"

This is _extremely_ naive. Google is a good example: you could immediately find a dozen examples where everybody, including them knows that a given solution/service/feature does not serve their users' interest -- it's for money.

It's exactly the other way around, that's why free market works. You focus on financial success, and THAT is going to lead to making your users happy. There are a lot of stories where the best alternative died because of the lack of a reasonable business model; and there are almost zero examples where most successful market participant was not the one with the best _overall_ solution. (Best overall == that is chosen by most of the people. And yes, Microsoft is one of them: we all remember how crappy Win95 was, but some of us might even remember that it did things nothing else on the market was able to do.)
I agree that Stellar is "obviously inferior".

If you want a centralized system, just use your bank, Paypal or whatever. Nobody was claiming that Bitcoin, a distributed system, was more efficient computing than other systems. The whole point of Bitcoin is that nobody controls it. Finding something that is more efficient than Bitcoin, without the decentralization, is plain stupid. I don't need an "expert" telling me that "hurr I could have done that faster with a SQL database".
Why is it any better/faster than a simple switch case like this in Clojure: #(case % 1 31 2 28 3 31 4 30 5 31 6 30 7 31 8 31 9 30 10 31 11 30 12 31)
We use SQS as a buffer at the front of an analytics system. The enqueuing app is written in Java using Dropwizard and Apache Camel. Average message size is probably ~1KB.
Which is another way of saying that the F-35 will not do close air support.
“Spin-off” coins: seed a new cryptocurrency with present-day Bitcoin balances
How We Earned $10,120 in 30 Days by Sending Horse Poop to People
It's not just clunky FFIs. There are simply some APIs and standards (like POSIX) that are more-or-less designed with a specific language in mind, in the aforementioned case that being C. Using them from a different language can simply feel awkward, though I suppose there has been a shortage of effort in bridging the gap.

I agree that the ridiculous dependency chains and brittle build tooling/bootstrapping are getting out of hand in modern development. Go actually gets this thing right, but is bare bones in every other regard (which I also appreciate, I enjoy Rob Pike's work).

I can't really think of any solution to this dilemma, though. Fundamentally, it's not just limitations of languages, but of operating systems, as well. Having a file server-centric OS design instead of a daemon-centric one for providing services alone will simplify a whole lot of things that we're used to abstracting in libraries.
The great irony is that Montier tests his argument by comparing the returns on shares of a company that claimed to be trying to maximize shareholder value with returns on shares of one that didn't. He evaluates his claim by the criterion he's railing against: "See?" he seems to say. "IBM tried to maximize shareholder value and J&J didn't, and J&J's stock did better! Therefore maximizing shareholder value is stupid!"

I'm not sure where on the list of world's stupidest ideas to put this idea that you can judge a measuring stick by using it to measure its advocates. All Montier has succeeded in demonstrating is that (a) the goal of maximizing shareholder value is so sacrosanct that even someone trying to undermine that goal naturally identifies good results with high share prices and bad with low; and that (b) Montier is really not arguing against the goal of maximizing shareholder value at all, but against the idea that explicitly trying to do so is effective.

And it does seem that maximizing shareholder value is a sort of financial anti-Heisenbug: don't worry about it and there's no problem, but the more intently you focus on it, the worse things get.
Disgrace: How a giant of science was brought low
How can you tell if a cipher is secure?
learning a language is all about repetition. and listening to podcasts and watching youtube videos -- here i'm thinking of lectures, online classes, and tutorials -- over and over again, will help you pick up new (technical) vocabulary + you have the added bonus of learning, apart from the language, some new concepts and/or modes of thinking.
Should better read: Americas "most effective" Warplane is Going Back into Battle.

As much I know, this plane is the most effective plane against ground targets. Some targets just can't be hit effectively from great heights and this plane also stays much longer in the area as other planes can. It might be the best compromise between a helicopter and a plane.

Also it is very cost effective in comparison to some of the more modern planes.
Slow programming might be too slow
True, but the Carlsbad desal plant in San Diego is going to build a bunch of solar collectors to offset much of its electricity demand. It's not clear they'll be able to offset all of it, but some is better than nothing, anyway.
Becoming more formidable
über vs. Uber
Alaskan bush pilots manage zero-roll takeoffs and landings, in favorable conditions. YouTube videos if you look for them.
Would it really affect the amount going toward farming very much? Taking away a few percent of farming use could give other uses huge amounts of water.

I could see a scenario where instead of some farmers getting underpriced water, there are more farmers competing to produce food at marginally higher prices, leading more of them to use better irrigation techniques and solving the problem.

Subsidies can be applied to the food prices after this point if desired, without the side effects of water shortages.
>Is the USA likely to go to war against anyone with sophisticated weaponry any time soon?

A military is like a parachute. It seems pretty useless until you need it.
Around 1980, when the news media took notice of hackers, they fixated on one narrow aspect of real hacking: the security breaking which some hackers occasionally did. They ignored all the rest of hacking, and took the term to mean breaking security, no more and no less. The media have since spread that definition, disregarding our attempts to correct them. As a result, most people have a mistaken idea of what we hackers actually do and what we think.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html
Am I wrong, or is this technique just a very advanced stroboscopy. Even though it may appear we are following the same pulse of light, that's not what is happening.

It is not one shot of light traveling, but every frame is created with a different pulse of laser captured at the right moment.

What I wonder is how did they figure out ways to capture such short exposure. That is the technological achievement making this happen.
I say we call it Partyember because it is the month most likely to have five full weekends.
"One could argue that a block chain fork could invalidate an arbitrary number of blocks at any time, and therefore the Bitcoin protocol does not by itself have this property of being able to tell which transactions really happened."

No, one could not argue that. The economic majority will decide which fork is valid. That's the opposite of centralization.

"To limit the number of blocks that could be invalidated in this way, the bitcoin reference implementation contains checkpoint hashes. These are indeed decided centrally.

If you accept the core assumption in bitcoin that an attacker will never control a majority of the hashing power, then there probably isn't a problem and the checkpoint s aren't needed."

You fail to realize you are not forced to download anything you don't want to. And the checkpoints are hundreds of blocks deep. They don't decide anything the network hasn't already decided (6 blocks deep transactions are considered practically irreversible). The checkpoints ARE needed as an anti-DOS measure (they protect the storage of full nodes from being flooded by forks that could suddenly start to appear at low block numbers). I don't know why people are so eager to spit opinions on things they don't know anything about.
>The core problem is definitely the support of custom types. I agree, if you refuse custom types everything gets a lot simpler.

Which makes perfect sense. If you cut everything down to bool, null, number, string, list and map you can represent anything and you get to remain language agnostic.

Dates can be encoded as strings and so can most of the other more 'awkward' types. This is additional work, but it's not that complicated and not a lot is gained anyhow by putting this stuff in the spec.

You really can't get more complicated than this anyhow, without introducing nasty security vulnerabilities.
Ok, interesting. That's not something I'd considered.
Why women are leaving the tech industry in droves
Who cares about the "technical merit" (which is a completely arbitrary measure) of a language?

Anyone who wants to produce good software efficiently, one would hope.

There IS no "objectively better" language.

Of course there is.

Language A and language B let you write identical code to solve a problem correctly, but language B does not admit a certain class of programmer error where language A does.

Language A and language B let you implement identical designs, but in language A you can do so concisely with direct semantic support, while language B requires 5x as much code and a load of boilerplate idioms.

There are different tools for different jobs, but sometimes there are also better tools for doing the same job.

There is only one question that matters to developers: Is this productive?

I'm not sure I agree with that, but in any case, it is purely the developer's perspective. There are many other questions that might also matter to someone who uses the software. Does it give the right answer? Does it run efficiently? Is it safe? Will those things still be true next year? These things all affect the value of the software, and if nothing else, that should make any commercial developer consider whether a better product would be worth more in the market.
Know I know why the regulations are worthless. All they do is protect certain businesses. In this case, taxi companies.

As a resident of Portland, I would love to use Uber. Last time I took a taxi, it was overpriced hassle to get one.
Irony Alert: Ms Gardner was the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, a site which has 90% male contributors and has had ongoing problems with the harassment of women contributors.
Julia and lambdas and maps
I wonder if higher Uber/taxi/Lyft usage is attributed with less drunken drivers on the road. Probably.
In all fairness, the JSF program at least started out as a legitimate response to the plethora of different airframes and programs coming out of the different branches of the US military (as well as the UK). For years, there was a lot of complaining about the costs of each service demanding to have its own designs because it was special and the Marines couldn't possibly make do with a plane designed for the Air Force, etc. etc.

Unfortunately, the history of trying to make merged designs isn't great. Differences in missions (and, frankly, the fact that those missions have been changing in many cases) seem to lead to designs that cost too much, don't do most tasks especially well, and take too long to design and build.
27-yr-old Delhi woman allegedly raped in an Uber cab
From 2007, but relevant because of the recent sale of his Nobel medal[0].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8703155
The tweet is from a journalist with Hindustan Times. No information (GPS, call logs, driver background check) is available locally.

https://twitter.com/Ankit_Tyagi01/status/541283660943458304

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/newdelhi/delhi-woma...

http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/delhi-woman-raped-alleged...
How neuroscience can help computer science – Yann LeCun
The designs shown make me feel forward looking, hopeful and excited. They make me feel like I want to get to work and make something of myself, my country and my planet.

The current designs in my wallet remind me of how I think of our country now, trying to get by on the momentum from past accomplishment.

And the two thoughts together make me wonder ... what are we trying to accomplish? As far as I can see, our greatest efforts as a country are trying to ensure that one part of the population doesn't accomplish anything that the other part doesn't want. We're living in the past and looking inward.
> Share prices are not something you can 'grow'.

Tell that to companies that have used the ZIRP environment to borrow cheap money to buy back their shares. According to Barclays, companies with the largest buyback programs have outperformed the market by 20% since 2008[1].

[1] http://online.wsj.com/articles/companies-stock-buybacks-help...
When was it withdrawn from service?
Just JVM things.
That was the development time period. Once a military problem is solved, it often doesn't need changing for a surprising amount if time. For inatance, imagine if we were still using a gun from 1911? (.45 ACP) But a gun from three decades before that would be laughably archaic.
Maybe better stated as developing an aircraft, or anything, has to define not only what it will do well, but what it won't do. It seems that for effective CAS, you have to be willing to say that this airplane will suck at air superiority, speed, and radar-stealthiness. You will never be able to nuke Moscow with it, and it seems that the USAF is not willing to build a plane like that.
> but he hasn't shown anything illegal.

Well, except for all the stuff detailing mass search and seizure[1] of domestic communication. While some people proclaim that the writs of assistance[2] issued by the FISA court make these searches legal, the constitution is still the highest law of the land.

> independent reviews

> [2]...whitehouse.gov

> [3],[4]...pclob.gov

You consider two parts of the executive-branch[3] to be "independent"? Even when one is a "five-member Board is appointed by the President"[4] and the other is "The President’s Review Group"[5]? That's about as far from "independent" as you can get.

[1] https://www.eff.org/files/2014/07/24/backbone-3c-color.jpg ( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/07/deeper-dive-effs-backb... )

[2] aka the primary reason the 4th Amendment exists. These non-specific, general warrants are the very thing the 4th Amendment forbids.

[3] "The PCLOB is an independent agency within the executive branch" ( http://www.pclob.gov/about-us.html )

[4] ibid

[5] see: your link #2, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-1...
PHP has come a long way in the last few years. Just like Javascript, the language has changed dramatically for the better.
How is "not [..] in the United States, Canada or Japan" the same as "UK Only"?
jbogp, I'd be interested to chat with you about your experience interviewing with DeepMind (found that searching HN for DeepMind info). My contact info is on my user profile page. Sorry about the thread-jack.
Agreed, I have had my ass saved more than once by hogs. That sound still gives me shivers.
I have worn Asics shoes for most of the time since 1981. However, shoe preference is very individual--friends have preferred Nike or New Balance or Brooks. Feet are shaped differently, and strides are not the same. And one's feet change over time; somewhere along the way I went from size 9.5 to 11.
This guy did the same thing in 2008:

http://rogeralsing.com/2008/12/07/genetic-programming-evolut...
>The vulnerabilities and limitations of concern are not addressed by air superiority. It lacks modern protection from more sophisticated ground threats.

>Basically, the US military...

Chair force types itching for a new jet.

> Looking forward, they expect this level of weapon sophistication to trickle down to increasingly unsophisticated adversaries.

That is a totally reasonable assumption. I agree that MANPADS may prove problematic. There is the potential to develop countermeasure for these, just not the will, which is a shame because the rotors would benefit from it as well. But, the AF doesn't care for those, either.

>The A-10 lacks the power systems required to drive modern defenses and weapons.

You state this as if it were some kind of objective proven fact. It isn't. It may be the case that some existing weapons system can't be bolted on; but it is not a credible assertion to say that that a suitable solution cannot be developed.

>It is no different than how the US military has been planning for the obsolescence of heavy armor.

It is quite different. Heavy armor is useless, everyone knows it, and to the .mil's credit they are phasing it out. The A10 fills an important CAS role that other platforms can't replace. The F35 definitely isn't going to perform well as an A10 replacement. The Apache works well, but for some reason (sortie cost / availability?) it hasn't obsoleted the A10. Some yet undeveloped unmanned drone might be able to do so, but that is yet to be demonstrated.
Keep in mind that Oracle is one of the companies actively working with NSA as per some of the Snowden leaks. I trust anything java based not at all. (on the more practical side)
it's obvious the post is focused on 1.0, the inclusion of the type system in 2.0 really increases the number of sins that can be committed.