skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
1. There are no non-free parts of SageMathCloud (here it all is: https://github.com/sagemath/cloud). It used to all be closed source, since the University tech transfer office required it in order to work with me... but I've since open sourced everything as required by the grants.

2. Regarding your next question, "the grant" I linked to is actually a program solicitation. It's the instructions for people preparing grants for the program, and also the guidelines for other people reviewing these grant proposals. The thing that is actually legally binding on the university is what the actual grant itself says. In my case the grant said (basically) "We will release all code under the GPL." I didn't write that phrase -- some other co-PI on the grant did -- but it was still signed off on by my office of sponsored research.
> One of my top 4 favorite explanations for the Fermi paradox is that biological intelligence always eventually creates machine intelligence, which wipes out biological life and then for some reason decides to makes itself undetectable

That's not an explanation of the fermi paradox, that's just moving the problem around. The SMI has no more reason to make itself undetectable than the guys that built it.
building and rebuilding and maintaining applications is hard enough. Now we have whitepapers from a company that wants to sell us on a new paradigm which -- cough cough -- they just happen to have software to support.
This is basically it. Designing a game? Build the Game service, with all your game logic. Need users and authentication now? Start writing an Identity service, and so on.

The only difference is that instead of starting to write some Identity class and use it in your Game service, you write some Identity class and expose it via a REST API, and then provide an interface library that interfaces with that REST API. Call it IdentityInterface or libidentity or something. Pydentity, whatever. It makes an HTTP request, gets a serialized object, unserializes it, and returns it.

For simplicity, put all your public models in that library, and it gets shared by both the Identity service and the Game service. Those models represent an object and what you can do with it. In the Identity service is where all of that actually happens.

This is also how you solve the 'multiple microservices at the same time' problem; your interface library provides the public interface, and the backend REST API is the 'private' API used by the public interface. You make changes to the backend API and the public library and no one notices, or you make incompatible changes to the public service and fix everything before you deploy; ideally, you add new APIs, migrate services over, then deprecate the old ones.

In the end, each service sees the world as fundamentally the same; there's a library with classes and functionality, and you use that to do things. If you design it right, it's never obvious from your code that you're accessing a different service elsewhere in your infrastructure.
Here's machine learning expert Michael Jordan on the issue: http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/artificial-intelligence/ma...
Agreed, and it sound like the type of comment made by a clever university student that hasn't experienced the typical soul crushing workplace.
Show HN: An Indie Game That Trains Your Brain
Just released this -- it's a game designed to test your spatial intelligence. I think it's pretty fun, so I thought I'd share.

iOS: http://bit.ly/1FXLVd3
Android: http://bit.ly/1FSflJx
Hey - Blake from Layer here. We're big fans of JSQMessagesViewController and a number of our early access developers built their UIs on top of it. The biggest difference between Atlas and JSQMessagesViewController at the moment is that Atlas is deeply integrated with the messaging services of Layer and the programming model exposed by LayerKit, while JSQMessagesViewController is backend agnostic. This translates directly into the amount of code that you need to write in order to get your UI and messaging fully wired. It's a trade-off -- with Atlas you write less code and have less things to coordinate within your UI, but you pick up a direct dependency on Layer. At this point there's a fair bit of overlap in functionality between Atlas and JSQMessagesViewController, but keep in mind that this is our 1.0 release. Looking a few months down the line, we'll be bringing a number of additional components and services online that will make the distinctions more apparent. We're also in the process of developing Atlas for Android and Web, which will share a similar API aesthetic. Hope this is helpful and you can find the time to give Atlas a whirl!
This is where the test-driven world, which in my experience is strongest on the dynamic language side of programming, has come back around full circle.

In microservices, everything is dynamically typed.

There is no single binary produced by a single compiler performing whole-program checks of consistency. Even tools like protobufs don't help when code bases drift, or someone introduces a foreign tool, or someone upgrades versions and introduces a subtle mismatch, or some doesn't know you call their service and shuts it down ...

Turns out that driving from tests, and starting those tests from the outermost consumer, is a fairly well-proved way of coping with such conditions.
Hah, the first time I met Bill Gates was at Percomp '78 in Long Beach California. This was a pretty small personal computer conference, but Microsoft was there pushing Altair BASIC. I had a Digital Group Z80 system (which I considered to be waaaaay superior to the Altair in the way that only a male high school student can project.) Bill was selling BASIC for $399, I had paid $900 for my entire system (as a kit). He offered to let me work for him and port it to the DG system, I declined. After all this guy was going nowhere, who in their right mind would pay more than half the price of their computer for BASIC right?

Looking back on that I cannot see any way in which I would have concluded differently, given the information I had available, but that experience has since given me insight to never dismiss an idea simply. I like to have solid reasoning behind my mistakes :-)
I've found the gui tools that come with git are actually the closest thing to SourceTree, and I'm tempted to switch to them because they're open source and work everywhere:

git gui (for staging and committing, including selecting lines to stage, which is in the right-click menu)
gitk --all (commit graph of all branches, switching checked out branch)

The main negative is a weird gui toolkit and some weird gui conventions (e.g., in "git gui", you click the _icon_ in the list of files on the left to stage/unstage the whole file)
Conventional monitors are all or nothing (60fps or 30fps), but that's changing.

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/g-sync

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/t...
The fact this got 8 upvotes so quickly (in 2 minutes) is super suspicious. Especially since it doesn't really say what it does and it just sounds like a goal-keeping service.

Anyone mind explaining to me what it's about?
Its a fun thought experiment, but I think it falls down when you start to consider how many "right bets" Microsoft, Apple and Google made. The other examples are no where near as mature and, to me, are still working on their initial idea.

The 3 I mentioned I think much of their success comes from implementing their first ideas very well and attracting the excellent talent which allowed them to pivot or broaden when other things came along.

Of course that then lands you back on another familiar YC idea of investing in teams rather than ideas.
A superintelligence would likely pursue both paths simultaneously - stripmine the Earth, and head for space.
I dunno, I'm not too worried. Seems to me that the Drake Equation should apply to AI as much as it does to extraterrestrial life, shouldn't it?

I mean if superintelligent AI is possible, then where are they? Surely they would have come about somewhere else in the universe by now.

So either they are hiding from us on purpose in which case they do regard us in some fashion as at least something to take note of and not disturb, or else they don't really have the inclination or ability to spread across the universe, in which case maybe they aren't as powerful as we've been led to believe.

Or maybe they don't exist to begin with because superintelligent AI just isn't possible for some reason...
The 0th version of facebook was literally "illegal stalking as a service." Outgrowth from that, and from ignoring the "we're accessing your systems illegally and you can't stop us" part, grew the horrible monster choking the Internet today.
Google launches Android for Work sandboxed enterprise environment
Oh I don't know if it will be all that long.

http://www.withings.com/us/withings-activite.html seems to be able to track and synchronize physical activity with my phone, runs on CR-2025 for 8 months. Don't know how they pull it off, but an inventive UI/watch interface to show me notification information like this one might be the ticket.
The cost of access to saunas is not zero in money, and not zero in time. This in itself creates differences between groups, which is why randomized trials are far superior to case-control or observational studies. This is so well established in medicine that there is no cause to rethink the reasoning.
You are confusing computer science with software engineering/programming. They are not the same.

The CS field does not move at breakneck pace. The core classes taught in CS are the same now as they were then.
The Spark Electron Adds Cellular Data to Your DIY Projects
The worst I can say about most HFR video I've seen is that it looked bit soap-opera like, which I get is a conditioned thing.

The Hobbit in particular, however, looked like it was playing back at 1.2x normal speed. I hated it. Kept expecting Buster Keaton to show up.

I wouldn't mind more movies shot in HFR, from what I've seen of it in general. It seems fine. Nice, even. I would prefer they not start doing whatever The Hobbit did.
You shouldn't. One partial solution to the inefficiency of the job market would be a standardized and centralized coding challenge that software engineers could take once and show to many potential employers. In fact, several startups are trying to create something like that. HackerRank is one example. TrueAbility is another, specific for DevOps. These are both great ideas because employers get the information they need and engineers don't have to waste time on repeated challenges. In the end, though, it's just a prelude to showing what you can do in person, since every online test will be hacked.
Well, we are talking about Finland.

http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/suoluk_asuminen_en.html

By the latest numbers there are 1 266 000 residential buildings in Finland, housing 1 581 000 saunas. But of course other buildings also have saunas, so in total there are more than 2 million saunas.

There are 5 451 270 people in Finland.

I'd say a lot of people have access to saunas.
No surprise there, universities are patent trolls and they stand to lose from it. Fuck them. I'm a student at UW-Madison. WARF stands for Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, and they're responsible for whoring out patents held by the school.

WARF was ranked the 5th worst patent troll by business insider in 2012. [1]

[1]: http://www.businessinsider.com/biggest-patent-holding-compan...
> ... you can stay and enjoy your newfound wealth

I'm not sure how true this is. If you're on a fixed income, for example, an increase in the value of your property doesn't do you much good unless you sell it. You could take out a mortgage... but then it's just a matter of time before you have to sell. Meanwhile the overall cost of living in your area is increasing due to the influx of wealthy residents.

EDIT: I think that if I were retired and found myself living in a neighbourhood which I could no longer afford, I would sell my house and buy a nice place in the countryside with the profits. But I can understand why some people might resist moving.
Free and pretty crappy & limited. When you can do better than the free crappy shit, people will pay. It was the same with Athena vs Motif.
"the gap between professionals and amateurs is getting smaller and smaller"

I guess you are meaning Django is not a professional framework?
I thought I did well. I asked a bunch of questions, solved what I could, and I think I did really well for my background!

They didn't move forward. Oh well!
Actually, that smelled like a project the company needed done, disguised as an interview test.
What they said in 1976 was that they wanted to be "able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software." So more than BASIC, but without the notion that the computer software market would grow to encompass everyone.
3 Al Jazeera journalists arrested in Paris for flying a drone
Chicago Startup Lets You Collect and Curate Every Single Wedding Pic via MMS
The elephant in the room is that taxpayers are subsidizing private tech industry that gets to keep all the profits from commercializations of public research, save for the pittance they sometimes pay for tech transfer licenses.

There is a bit a selective outrage going on here. How dare those universities try to profit from taxpayer research! The nerve!

Meanwhile tech companies make billions of profits on these inventions without paying a dime back to the government, apart from the taxes that all companies pay.

At least the pittance that some pay back to universities via tech transfer helps support further public research. The government grants don't always cover the full cost of labs and professorships.
His thoughts seem quite sensible, although extremely abstract and theoretical. This is lightyears away from the Elon Musk / Bill Gates / etc. fear-mongering.
"If you're going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Why is this service not sustainable within a year? Seems like a totally valid business to me.

edit: Next year, one of us is going to be laughing.
How does framing the question this way lead to deeper thinking or rather, yield different answers, than the typical questions of 'whats the bigger picture' or 'whats the company vision' ?
Those statics don't cover company internal websites.
Yes, unjust laws should be ignored. Is it unjust for a culture to attempt to regulate the rate at which it admits outsiders? I don't think so. As outsiders enter an organisation, they both alter it and are altered by it; if too many enter it before they are altered by it (i.e., assimilated), then the organisation fundamentally changes.

We all know that this is true of startups; if a startup grows too quickly, it risks losing the culture which enabled it to succeed in the first place. Risk-takers are slowly drowned out by risk-avoiders, and eventually the startup loses its drive. Is it so crazy that the same would be true of states?

I posit that there's nothing unjust about regulating the rate of influx into a society, and plenty unjust about flouting those regulations and cutting one's place in line.

Incidentally, Edward Snowden should be hanged by the neck until dead; quoting him is hardly compelling.
lame firms will figure it out after being turned down several times, and eventually change the procedure. but hot firms can do whatever they want bcoz there r way more candidates than vacancies. that's what we call a "free market".
Where is part 2?

I can't find a link here or on the blog.
It wasn't just renting out their flat, they let other people rent out their air mattresses (or couches) too.

Early on their idea was to be a "Bed and Breakfast", to the point where they required the hosts to cook breakfast for the guests.
Experience the World's First Spanish Class in VR This Monday at 5PM PT
Google Bans Sexually Explicit Content from Websites Hosted on Blogger
Andrew, in that case, is definitely right in that long-term AI safety has almost nothing to do with near-term AI implementation.

More generally, when I see people assert that these people don't know what they're talking about, it pretty much always seems like a case of reference class confusion. People seem to expect that AI safety research must look exactly like AI implementation research, otherwise it's illegitimate. (Kind of like how biology research must look exactly like chemistry research, otherwise it's illegitimate.)

This is a game theory problem; it might be informed by knowledge of machine learning, like how a broad understanding of chemistry helps in much biology research, but they're not the same level of abstraction; insisting that anyone who wants to study a problem that kind of touches on your own research interests must do it in exactly the same way you do it and focus on exactly the same things, otherwise they're hacks and crackpots, reeks of narrow-mindedness.
The problem is that microservices are not objects. They leak reality into your problem domain in a way that simply cannot be made to go away.

If regular object oriented programming languages had method calls that randomly failed, were delayed, sent multiple copies of a response, changed how they behaved without warning, sent half-formed responses ... then yes it would be the same.

Distributed systems are hard, because you cannot change things in two places simultaneously. All synchronisation is limited by the bits you can push down a channel up to, but not exceeding, the speed of light. In a single computer system this problem can be hidden from the programmer. In a distributed system, it cannot.

Probably the most devastating critique of the position that "it's just OO modeling!" came in A Note on Distributed Computing, published in 1994 by Waldo, Wyant, Wollrath and Kendall[0]:

"We look at a number of distributed systems that have attempted to paper over the distinction between local and remote objects, and show that such systems fail to support basic requirements of robustness and reliability. These failures have been masked in the past by the small size of the distributed systems that have been built. In the enterprise-wide distributed systems foreseen in the near future, however, such a masking will be impossible."

[0] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.41.7...
Launching on Product Hunt vs. Hacker News
Can you clarify the question? I'm not sure what "in return of time of work" means. Are you surveying HN as personal investments, or as employers?
Most systems I've seen these days don't have any compile-time type checking, since they're all written in Ruby, Python, or Node.js.

In the normal case of development, you tend to have a broken-out system. For a game for example:

+ Game code
--+ User authentication classes/functionality (which accesses DB)
--+ Messaging classes/functionality (which accesses DB)
--+ User metrics classes/functionality (which accesses DB)

In the new design you'd have this:

+ Game code
--+ User authentication classes/functionality (which accesses REST service)
--+ Messaging classes/functionality (which accesses REST service)
--+ User metrics classes/functionality (which accesses REST service)

In other words, in a clean design, your Game code is accessing a library which provides user Authentication functionality, one which provides Messaging functionality, and one which provides Metrics functionality.

In this new design, you have exactly the same thing - a library which abstracts the details of communicating with the service, encoding data, etc. A person making changes to those libraries, which other services use, is responsible for either not making backwards-incompatible changes, or, when that isn't possible, working with other teams to ensure a clean upgrade path (or doing it themselves, if your lines are sufficiently blurred).
A Google Computer Can Teach Itself Games
Hopefully! Otherwise something has gone wrong.
After the Bitcoin Gold Rush
it seems like a gamified way of saving money, well-thought.
Story.AM – A Storytelling Platform
After nearly six months in development, Story.AM Beta is now available. Create, collaborate, and sell interactive longform narratives on a dedicated hosting platform built for storytelling.
Excerpt:

The Google program successfully taught itself the rules to over 49 Atari 2600 computer games from the 1980s, eventually figuring out strategies for victory. This included figuring out navigation, actions and positive outcomes, then using these for improved outcomes.

In 43 of the games, which included such classics as Space Invaders and Breakout, the D.Q.N. outperformed previous computational efforts to win, the paper said. In more than half the games, the new system could eventually play at least three-quarters as well as a professional human games tester.

By figuring out for itself the rules of a system, the D.Q.N. occasionally surprised its creators with new winning strategies. Playing Seaquest, for example, the computer determined that the game’s submarine could survive by staying near the surface for the entire game. In Breakout, it figured out a novel way to get through a wall of bricks.
Boy, while I think the author and I share a lot of ideas about the way people are changing (perhaps not for the better) in response to the age of information, this article is full of misconstruals and accusatory speculation. The complaint is not new or original, and to me, the author's sentimentality undermines her argument.
I have to strongly disagree with this article. Altair BASIC was not lame for it's time. It was GREAT! There was no OS, there were barely any assemblers, you would have to toggle switches to binary representation to enter code in home brew computer.

Without BASIC, You do have to first of all learn assembly programming, learn to assemble it by hand and translate to hex/binary then flip it in. BASIC was amazing for the time, anyone could and can program in BASIC.

Google was not lame for the time, search engines sucked, no one saw/used google and said why? The first time we all used google we were hooked, we didn't have to AND OR NOT our results, it found meaningful results from the get go.

Now Facebook we could argue that about if it would take off, you might say, why? There's already myspace. But I don't know that the Microsoft BASIC or google search was lame in any way shape or form. If we all folks did was hear about the idea, then yes, they would easily be brushed off, but after implementation, it was a no brainer. Kinda like Tesla, all electric cars have really sucked until Tesla showed you could make electric cars stylish, fun to drive and with range.
The NIH has similar requirements in some RFAs, and has funded the creation and maintenance of a number of open-source, widely-used libraries such as ImageJ, the Visualization Toolkit, and the Insight Toolkit (either directly or indirectly via support for clinically-focused applications utilizing those).
Put into YOUR contract with YOUR clients that upgrading ain't free.
"Because we don’t understand how human intelligence works in any meaningful way, it’s difficult to make strong statements about how close or far away from emulating it we really are."

It's also equally difficult and rather stupid to assume that we will ever be able to emulate it at all, which is the entire premise of this idiotic article.
You could have a service bus, where you publish a "PersonDeleted" message that the other services would subscribe to. It decouples the Person service from all the other related entity services.

You'd have to allow for propagation delay. Plus the possibility of a message storm if you delete something fairly fundamental.
Just for starters, consider how an unemployed walmart cashier, strawberry picker, or janitor becomes a doctor. They don't. Replacing humans with machines exactly causes unemployment, as could be easily seen by eg the last 40 years of economic history. Unemployed people can't buy anything.

You could also consider comparing the approaching wave of robotic mechanization with the first wave. Again, there was a lot of violence and it took many decades for increased standards of living to reach the working class.

Your entire post is economically illiterate.