skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is "Firefox", but it's still using the Safari rendering and JavaScript engine under the hood (like Chrome for iOS does), because there isn't an option to do otherwise.
Cancerous cells flourish as well.
"Degrade gracefully" has been a guideline for almost precisely as long as it's been a guideline principally honored in the breech.
It's http://paste2.org/_M631b9cy for the archive.
Homeless CEO
No, I completely agree. I did mention in the comment that I would of course be cautious. And I think it's very plausible (at least there's no reason I can think of to disagree) that the universe is a fundamentally unsafe place.

Even though it may be anthropomorphizing to an extent, there are alot of attributes humans have that are not so desirable, such as mortality. As far as we know computers (sufficiently replenished) have a theoretically infinite lifespan. I completely agree that there's no way to determine what kinds of effects those differences will have on how machine intelligence would evolve.
Lenovo.com has been hacked, possibly by Lizard Squad
"Google Play for Work" is as bad as "Playstation" is good. They really shouldn't let this awkward branding stuff happen.
As is refusing to ship something.
I think a coding evaluation that requires an unreasonable amount of time to complete is inappropriate. So if that's the case, your premise is fine. However, burning bridges is a poor strategy and what I can't deny is that you acted with an attitude and were arrogant.

Yes, I enjoy wasting time on mindless projects because I retired at 31...and was a tech recruiter. I would be happy to teach you a few things in professionalism, economics, all of the above :)
I've been pair programming off and on since the beginning of the century. You can get in the zone with a pair (if you're doing it right), but less often. I get a huge charge out of the highfive at the end of a task. And often I'm learning something new or was made to think about something from a different perspective. That could be the whole point of life itself. It's enormously satisfying.

But pair programming evens out the peaks (programming in the zone) and valleys (spinning your wheels) though so you have something close to a sustainable pace. The productivity and life of the entire team is much more important than the productivity of an individual on the team. Sometimes I spend an entire day helping someone else accomplish something instead of what I want to do. Sometimes it's the reverse. People come and go. The mission is larger and longer.
That's a good and complete summary.

I have been curious about Erlang for some time. The syntax keeps sending me running in the other direction, but perhaps I just haven't found a suitable project to work on where I could have an excuse to really dig in. any favorite resources you can recommend on learning Erlang?
PG sounds like it's okay to invest time,
effort, code, money, etc. in a project
without having any idea why it might work,
and his justification is Microsoft,
Facebook, Google, etc.

Okay:

I grew up not far from a nice public golf
course. It had some par 3 holes. Sure,
on such a hole, it's possible to make a
hole in one.

Okay, for a year track all the hole in one
successes and see how many were by expert
golfers and how many were by people lucky
to have a round at 10 over par.

So, conclude from this that for a hole in
one it doesn't help to be good at golf?
Nope! Instead, on that course there were
so many more poor players than expert ones
that, likely, net, just from luck, there
were more successful hole in one shots
from the poor players than from the expert
ones.

Or, case #9,284,387,437 of how to lie with
statistics!

But, let's consider some other examples:

Ike wanted some pictures of the USSR
and sent some U-2 airplanes. Too soon one
got shot down, and then someone called
Kelly Johnson at Lockheed, and he noticed
a new engine developed by Pratt and
Whitney in their Florida operation: The
engine was a turbojet until about Mach 2.5
at which time it became a ram jet and,
thus, could go on to Mach 3+ without
overheating the engine.

So, get some titanium, design some
aerodynamics especially good for
supersonic flight, and get an airplane
that could fly at Mach 3+, at 80,000+
feet, for 2000+ miles without refueling.
Then the US got a lot of good pictures,
and the Lockheed plane, the SR-71, never
got shot down.

There are many more examples from GPS, the
F-117, the first Xerox copier, etc.

These examples are cases of hole in one
with high payoff and low risk from just
routine work after the initial planning
and review of the plans.

Commercial version?

Okay: Xerox, the IBM System 360, the
Intel 386, Cisco IP routers, the Bell Labs
work in optical fibers and Ga-Al-As
heterojunction lasers, the Sony work on
Blu-ray optical disks, etc.

Lesson: It really is possible to pick a
good target, plan carefully, execute with
low risk, and be successful. For just one
team, poor work and luck are not better.
Last little ice age was just a few houndred years ago.
It loads for me, though the content seems to be pulled in via js.
Gotta love the tags
<meta name="description" content="The new and improved rebranded Lenovo website featuring Ryan King and Rory Andrew Godfrey">
Not recommended for out of towners.
Twitter has always been almost useless as a driver of traffic for me, but it has been a good medium for connecting with people I wouldn't have otherwise on the network itself. It simply doesn't bleed into the outside world all that much.

As a networking tool however, it's been way more effective than Facebook, LinkedIn, or any of the others I've used, and I fall very much into the casual/occassional user camp.
How to turn your iPad into a pro graphics tablet
>Seems like your problem is with bad idioms, you seem to be a fan of the Play style -- both are just idioms, a simple way to improve communication.

No, my problem, is with the pre-supposed and agreed upon set of idioms ("idiomatic Go", "idiomatic Java", "idiomatic Python").

I'm not even against what those idioms contain per se, as individual items.

>"different but convenient" can to be looked at in two different ways. The first is for you, the original developer. It is more convenient for you... but what about the next 5 (or 50) developers who are unfamiliar with the idioms in play, it will radically slow them down as they lack the shorthand to quickly understand it.

Well, the reverse can be true.

Java programmers familiar with the circa-2004 idiomatic BS over-reliance of GoF patterns and deep class hierarchies created code that was "idiomatc Java EE" but difficult to undertand, overengineered, and inflexible.

Someone coding unidiomatic Java (e.g. Play) and giving the project to them, they'd instantly understand what its going on -- even better than someone giving them an "idiomatic Java EE" monstrocity.

>Go is about programming at scale (in terms of people) and something that benefits one while slowing down all others is going to be looked down on

People keep saying that, but most Go projects I've seen are made by only few of people, maybe even a couple. Plus, people complain about even single-developer Go projects being "unidiomatic".

Programming at scale, like big 3D games, Photoshop, the Linux Kernel, Webkit etc, is still done in C/C++, with no sign of this changing.
You realize there are literally tens of thousands of people just like the poster you're responding to. Including me.
I've been wondering how much snow needs to drop before we start growing glaciers.
I'm afraid of making a middlebrow dismissal but I'm going to post it anyway, in hopes that someone just skimming would not be mislead.

The question is what Michael Jordan thinks of the "concept of the singularity", and then he dismisses it out of hand.

Crucially, he does this after confessing that no one in his social circle has talked about this issue with him, and without saying anything about what form of Singularity he is dismissing.

I mention this, because oftentimes I see people appealing to authority, quoting them on the issue and the authority in question is not even talking about the same issue!

I worry that my credence in all this superintelligence stuff only stems from familiarity with the arguments and the complete inability of people to engage with the actual argument. Some of the 'rebuttals' in this comments section have answers in Sam's article for crying out loud!
Henry VIII's evidence to support break with Rome turns up in Cornish library
Ignoring the snark of your comment: indeed, many people chose Perforce either because they have binaries that require revision control or because their trees are huge.

We have to suffer under Perforce for the first of those reasons (we have artwork and CAD files none of which are text). Sadly, P4 is pretty much the only game in town for a medium sized organization with binaries (someone large like Google can afford to replace it with an in house solution but that isn't worth it for most of us).

I tried annex a few years ago and it was also painful, but perhaps it's gotten better. Certainly I miss the power of git when using P4.
> 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're still screwed if you complete a transaction on the deleted person's still-existing account, now that your system is no longer transactional...
Sorry, I can't use software that isn't "made with love". Consider revising. You might also consider having your code snippets hosted with ❤.

Kidding of course -- the love that went into this is self-evident.
>Sounds like they will ship CNC machines, just not the one sold by Defense Distributed. Not cool.

The guys just need to have an additional "doing business as" cuddly name like "Tools for Local Sustainable Toy Milling and Crafting"
Preventing other browsers for technical reasons is very different than doing so for policy reasons. iOS prevents other browsers in both ways. ChromeOS (and FirefoxOS, and others) might limit you technically, but do not limit you by policy.

When the limitations are just technical, you can try to work around them, but when they are a flat policy, like Apple does, there is nothing you can do.
10 most valuable tech startup exits of 2014 in the UK
Ironically, I'd never heard of Wadhwa until the current campaign accusing him of hogging the spotlight started.
I have to hand it to the Defense Distributed guys, they sure know how to turn a non-story into headline news.

Short version: FedEx and UPS get worried about liability as DD tells them they are mailing 'make your own gun kits' and decline to ship, until they understand where the ATF stands on the issue.

There are a ton of things you can't ship. A number of those things are pre-cursor components to "bad things" be it bombs, weapons, or chemical compounds. Guess who takes it in the shorts for shipping them? The shipper. So our government has trained these folks to be conservative in what they will accept until they have their collective backsides covered.

I get that DD is trying to foster some sort of conversation about how easy it is to fabricate fire arms, but what I don't get it what they hope to achieve, other than sales to people who are paranoid about having the 2nd amendment repealed.
I may be looking a little too much into this headline, but I really think it speaks to the way humans look at the earth as some static, immutable system.

How could someone even go about calculating these odds on something so dynamic. Boston was literally under ice 20K years ago and will probably be completely under water in another 20K years.
I don't see how it's that hard to avoid Wadhwa's mistake. Despite what the article asserts, from what I've seen his problem wasn't so much his tone on Twitter as it was that he was putting himself forward -- and being booked to speak at conferences, etc. -- as a spokesperson for women in tech. And the spokesperson for women in tech shouldn't be a man, no matter how well-intentioned he is. It should be a woman. Women are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves; they don't need a man to do it for them.

If you're a man (like I am!), and you want to help women in tech (like I do!), and someone approaches you to speak at a conference about that, the thing to do is to recommend some awesome women you know to speak instead. Instead of talking about how women need support in this industry, support an actual woman in the industry.

Otherwise you run the risk of coming off like Wadhwa did. He looked like a carpetbagger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger) -- someone who had identified a hot trend and jumped on it to raise his own personal profile. And if you're a man who sincerely wants to help women, the way you do that is by helping them raise their own profiles, rather than using their problems to goose your own.
The labeling now more accurately reflects observed usage patterns.

Sort of the opposite tactic of most companies who try to squeeze serving sizes to meet certain nutritional milestones despite having no basis in real-life usage of the product. I'm looking at you Pop-Tarts! No body eats one tart at a time.
The title is a bit misleading. The abstract states that "significant inverse associations were also observed for fatal CHDs and fatal CVDs (P for trend ≤.03) but not for all-cause mortality events." So going to a sauna 4-7 times a week for these middle-aged Finnish men decreased their chance of dying from a heart attack. But they still might die from something else at the same or somewhat increased rate. I'd argue that the raised heat and humidity in the sauna might have caused an increased workout for the heart. "Shocking" the heart like this almost every day to every other day of the week for twenty years made them more able to survive fatal CHDs and CVDs.
> It's not dumb luck. MS made a fortune from marketing and business politics, not from cool technology.
MS was never primarily a tech company, it was a sales-and-marketing-and-M&A company that happened to sell tech products.

The Apple of the eighties.
> The argument that WebSQL was tailored to a specific SQLite version is nonsense.

No, the idea that WebSQLDB was not tailored to a specific SQLite version is nonsense. See Section 5 of the last version of the WebSQLDB spec [0]:

User agents must implement the SQL dialect supported by Sqlite 3.6.19.

> SQLite supports the official SQL92 standard

SQLite version 3.6.19 does not support all of, or only, the SQL92 standard. WebSQLDB did not mandate support for the SQL92 standard, or any other standard version of SQL, it specified the dialect supported by SQLite 3.6.19.

[0] http://www.w3.org/TR/webdatabase/#databases
The UPS guy is saying what UPS should say. Of course, the reality is that UPS has no idea what's inside of all those boxes.
> But it's also true that it's unreasonable to demand that the technology be released freely.

I disagree entirely with this blanket statement. In fact, somewhere in this thread you'll find a university researcher speaking to how me eventually got everything open sources, and how certain funding is coming with open-source requirements.

We can debate whether or not it's in the public interest for the tech to be released, but it's never unreasonable to consider whether it should be released freely.

> Now, realize that the two issues are independent.

No they're not. #2 is entirely irrelevant. This is why eminent domain laws are so hotly debated - because fair compensation is often not fair compensation.

> Practically, the government is just another investor.

There is no investor that invests money in to private enterprise and gets no return when that private enterprise profits.
Bluntly, it's a great processor on paper, but for the most part, its performance falls severely short of its paper specs.

While I was really looking forward to Intel shipping a competitive processor to NVIDIA's GPUs, reality disappointed. Intel put 2 engineers on porting a piece of code I wrote for a year. That code is roughly 20x faster on a Maxwell class GPU than on a Haswell class CPU (all cores firing). 2 man years later, instead of the Xeon Phi performing on par with a C1060/GTX 285 as it initially did, it managed to accelerate the CPU code by ~10%. In that time, NVIDIA shipped GK104, GK110 and then GM204 accelerating my code by a factor of 2 relative to GK104. When I tried to help one of the Intel engineers catch up to at least Fermi class GPUs, he got mad at my algorithmic choices and stormed out of the room.

Intel IMO will resort to dumping these things at rock bottom prices into data centers in order to spoof just enough low information government wage HPC administrators into believing these things are good for anything more than playing Jenga with them. And that will keep NVIDIA from achieving total HPC dominance in the short term.

No idea what the long-term will bring. Intel ought to be able to deliver a compelling part one day, but I suspect that will be a CPU with wider SIMD and more cores.
In my group we actually go old school, sit around at a table with printouts for a lot of things (not the trivial stuff). It gets a lot of raised eyebrows from other groups in the company and I was skeptical when I joined but I've come to really appreciate it.

I've found two things happening:

1) People are often more engaged in the actual review than in other groups I've been in which are doing online reviews. And here I'm talking more about a back and forth and not necessarily "everyone says their one thing". Because of this, I believe our group's thinking of stuff has evolved more rapidly than it otherwise would have. Which leads me to ...

2) It's been better for ramping new members up to speed as it's a great place for them to ask questions, not to mention listen in to the debates happening.

I hadn't done an old style code review like that for at least 10 years, but I have to say that I've enjoyed it.
The fact of the matter, is that Google usually publishes their source. They're just a bit slow at it. Most versions of android ship in binary form before source is released.
People + Packages: The Future of Same-Day Delivery – Sidecar
Modern sports games usually need the same stats from a simulated game as they would get from a played game so simulating is often just running a stripped down version of a full game.
> The most rewarding part of pairing for me is probably the learning/teaching dynamic.

That can also happen during code review. Granted, it's asynchronous, but that might be seen as a boon by some -- especially if there's a language barrier.

You have to do code review right, i.e. a) no judgement of the person, b) no friggin' code review in-person meetings(!), and c) must be automated via some system (e.g. Gerrit), and d) the reviewer must also be willing to yield on non-critical issues (such as minor formatting, naming, etc.). Ultimately you also need a team technical lead to make the call in case of unresolvable disputes. (If the lead's code is being reviewed then it behooves them to reason convincingly for their own position, concede when shown wrong and try to remain as impartial as possible. IME as a team lead, admitting when you're wrong is an incredible way to build trust.)
I suggest that anyone considering sharing a personal device with work activity (other than basic phone calls and messaging, e.g. "I'll be in late") think twice.

Comes a security concern or conflict, someone's probably going to want access to the whole thing.

If you want me to do "your work" on a phone -- particularly as an employee as opposed to as an independent contractor utilizing their own resources as defined in the contract -- then give me a phone. A hassle, but on the other hand some protection, in exchange for a few additional ounces (phone weight) of prevention, as it were.

Just like I don't want to use my own computer to host their work/data. Nope. When the relationship ends, I turn in their equipment and there is no question as to whether all relevant data has been expunged. They have the entire device.
Shop.lenovo.com compromised
URL: http://shop.lenovo.com/

So I don't know what happened yet, but it's an "interesting" slideshow and soundtrack to say the least.
This dragnet collection and _permanent storage_ of all movement and communications data is not justifiable, though.

Fundamental risk assessment fail!
Not if it is encrypted.
Python's response to the recent bug found in Timsort
As soon as you distribute your system, you have dynamic typing, whether you like it or not.

At runtime you are inspecting incoming messages and then routing them to code. It doesn't matter what language the code is written in, it will need to route and validate the messages at runtime.

The type system cannot provide compile-time assurances of behaviour, because it cannot create a single consistent binary which enforces the guarantees.

Your only remaining tool is to drive code from tests and only from tests.
This seems as if it is conflating the worry that nuclear bombs would ignite the atmosphere with supersonic travel.

Who predicted this?
Two Pop-Tarts at once? I've never done that.

...But then again, I don't eat an awful lot, and that's why I was originally interested in the "revised serving size"-- I'm wondering what other Soylent drinkers do if their caloric input is usually (far) less than 2000 cal/day.
Could anyone at RealScout comment on why you started committing directly to master? This point seemed under-examined in your blog post, despite being a very unconventional git strategy.
True, but lets not pretend this is a legal question. Given that UPS will ship 8 pound jugs of gunpowder to unlicensed individuals every day of the week and twice on Sunday, I have a hard time believing they have some sort of philosophical objection to guns. (I have personally shipped a gun legally via UPS).

So I'm going to conclude the real issue is fear. Fear of governmental overreach and all the hassles it can bring.
And phones in nearly all cases are limited by thermal profile. That's what keeps you from running at full tilt on a mobile device even when plugged in.
Why is Mr. Wilson going out of his way to tell them what it's for?

"What are you shipping?"

"CNC Mill."

"Great, we'll be happy to ship that for you."

Don't try to confuse the customer service rep by saying things that have the potential to confuse them; they don't need to know what it's meant for.

It's doubtful that UPS, at a high level, cares enough to ban this. Rather, someone heard "something something GUN MACHINE," doesn't know anything about the relevant law, and made a snap decision that was least likely to get them in trouble.
I admit, my first sentence was in poor taste. Apologies to Andrej.

At the same time, saying that something isn't possible to prove when we literally have no idea about its provability isn't a good stance for a researcher to take.

This is similar to my problem with the list of AI researchers you've provided. Saying that there is nothing to fear and waving your hands isn't exactly scientific.

Also, it isn't like these people (Sam, Musk, etc) literally think it could happen any day. The point is that we should be aware of the risk and prepare accordingly -- why is that unreasonable?
> Incidentally, Edward Snowden should be hanged by the neck until dead; quoting him is hardly compelling.

Hopefully we can continue to marginalize people with such an opinion. Exposing government corruption should never be a capital offense.
This is an important counter to this strange fear-mongering trend. Whatever advances a supposed intelligent machine can use, people will first put it to their own best use - including defense, not from autonomous machines, but from other people using these advances. We'll have a lot of experience and good tools to protect ourselves.
Isn't there an app that restricts these permissions? I believe your phone has to be rooted for it to work though.
Blocking their tracking (New Relic) means the page won't load.