skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What I object to is this statement:

> And you don't have to leave your frame of reference to see a difference between acceleration and gravity, they are distinguishable in any frame of reference.

You're clearly presenting an idealized situation, which is fine. You've chosen a non-idealized (or less idealized) gravitational field, which is also fine. But the convention when talking about this particular subject is to also idealize gravity and take it as being the same everywhere. If somebody reads this statement with the usual definition of gravity, they might get the wrong idea.

All it needs is some signal that the gravity you're using is different (less symmetric) than usual. It is an interesting idea, I'm just saying maybe present it a little differently so people like me don't get confused.
Samsung May Help Apple Get Rid of a $533M Patent Verdict
Mysterious Blobs Rain Down Over Washington in 1994
Must comments be soothing and agreeable to be appreciated at all? Is it okay to be caustic if you're also making a good point?

For example, I often say intentionally chaotic things in relation to Microsoft stories because we have a history and this reflects my current impression of that company.

That said, I find a lot of their recent changes, open source contributions, and future plans very agreeable and sometimes amazing and I try to point that out.

So, is it ok to dredge up their past transgressions if I can simultaneously make positive observations regarding MSFT's future?

Even though I tinge towards the negative/chaos, I notice that I can 'score' better with people whenever I put effort into the quality of my writing.
Ok, good to know, thanks.
That reads like some of the mediation or non-violent communication advice I've heard.

The point is that it lets people feel like they've been heard and understood.
❯❯❯ brew install rust
Warning: rust-1.0.0-alpha.2 already installed

:(
Angular really needs ui-router, lodash/ramda, and jquery (for more than just AJAX).

React doesn't need a router for many uses (extending existing sites), but does need lodash/ramda and an AJAX library. ImmutableJS is useful for both angular and react (as is rxjs/baconjs). For a beginner, I would simply say React, Reflux, Ramda, and jQuery will do 90% of the things. Learning all four of these libraries (they probably already know jQuery) will take less time than Angular and be more flexible if they want to swap one out later.

Finally, adding these is much easier with commonJS than the angular dependency injection (often on top of commonJS).
Libra Now Available as an Official Coinbase App
Reading the "How to Sell to Business" section convinced me as an engineer that I should not focus on Haskell. If Haskell programmers are a better deal for businesses because better programmers can be hired for less money, I should logically choose to be a Java programmer for the same reason.
But just like with some computers where you void your warranty by cracking it open and performing upgrades by yourself, all the car manufacturer has to do is sell their cars with the same requirement. You start messing around with the internals and a flag is set in the car that they just have to check for to determine if they're really at fault for what you're claiming or not.
Things You Should Never Say to Women Working in Tech or Science
Faster PDFs with wicked_pdf and delayed_job (part 1)
Thanks for the contribution! Minor point: It would be nice if the demo's slider would be draggable on mobile, iOS Safari can't see it in action.
Speaking of tape. Apparently, still in use:

http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/02/cern-data-cent...
The scenery and pictures don't do much to elicit a reaction from me. There are quite a few natural places as bleak and "hellish" as the landscape he describes, some that people actually appreciate for their austere "beauty". I'd like to know more about the impact on wildlife and people, maybe what it looked like before and after.
I also like the (related) idea of an Ideological Turing Test:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_Turing_Test
So then: is there any better solution? Or is that the optimal?
> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all.

I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect.

If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshit opinions are called out as such.

edit: shit you guys, can't you go with the reading my comment charitably or will you hit that downvote button again, thereby showing your hypocrisy?

I love the internet, I really do.
You are completely wrong on your assumption when you are linking AngularJS's origin to Server-Side Java.

Most of concepts in AngularJS directly came from Silverlight and WPF. Before even Angular came into existence, I used to use the same pattern for building Windows/Browser centric client side apps on WPF/Silverlight. When AngularJS announced in 2009, it took me 30 minutes to get my head around everything & there has not been much changes since then.

The only thing AngularJS invented was Dependency Injection for JS.
Considering the audience you might be right. I'm not a typical audience member. I read in the evening on a phone with a slow 2.5g connection. For that reason I use opera mini. HN works perfectly on it and the combination of the browser and whatever it is HN does for layout means I can load a HN page faster than anything else on the web. It doesn't seem to matter how many comments there are. So I hope it doesn't change. But you are right. I'm not typical.
I've evaluated Light Table a couple of weeks ago and wasn't really happy with it (it's a lot better than Facebook's hot code swapping lib though). I don't need React or any of that stuff (I don't mind writing plain HTML5, ES5, and CSS3). I just want to do graphics programming in real time. Is there anything besides Shadertoy I should be looking at?
Downvotes not being for disagreement is an absurd redditism. Upvotes are used for agreement, so it is only natural that downvotes are used for disagreement.

PG has stated in the past that downvoting things you disagree with is proper usage on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691

I don't know if 'dang has changed this policy, but if so I haven't heard about it.
A polarizing name, if perhaps less so amongst programmers
Please remove the ability to download. Downvotes are the first step towards meanness.
I have a sneaking suspicion that maybe, just maybe, the looks of HN have helped protect the community against trolls. Everybody knows internet commenting is crude, rude and awful more often than not. In my opinion HN is a glorious example of an online community done right and I'm not sure we should change the site.

But who knows, maybe it will even be better if it gets a little make-over.
> If you are so certain that they are dumb and arriving at incorrect prices (but quickly) it should be easy for you to go trade against them and make a lot of money.

It is easy to do this, as demonstrated by the article. Just con the algorithms with fake newsfeeds.

That's also illegal though, so no one is going to go out and prove it. They shouldn't need to when we can see natural experiments like this.
That's true if you assume that every feature moves the community forward. But not all of them do; many features regress us. For instance: unlike on Reddit, there's no indication when someone's responded to one of your questions. As a result, very few arguments last more than a few hours here.

I'm particularly leery of collapsible threads, although my understanding is we're about to get them anyways.
Thanks. This is cool.
Have you faced any complications in understanding how navigation is performed on the page? (if we imagine that the content is not actually related to the subject and does not explain how the indication works)
You're responding to a pretty weak interpretation of what we're talking about here. :) The point is to address the strongest plausible interpretation of what another is saying. It's pretty well-established what the Principle of Charity means [1]. (By the way, you can see from [2] that there's an ongoing discussion about formalizing it for HN.)

I don't think it's a stretch, mutatis mutandis, to take even a comment like "go fuck yourself" charitably. It could, indeed probably mostly does, mean "I'm angry about something unrelated."

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

2. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:dang%20principle%20of%2...
The common R package for integrating C++ is called "Rcpp", so calling it "cpp" isn't that strange in context.
"Giving back losses" was supposed to be humorous. Apologies.
> I definitely get into "I'm the world's biggest asshole today" mode too frequently.

No you don't.
You sound knowledgable so thought I'd ask here :) ...
Would there be any logic/benefit in a modern lisp machine? e.g. if intel decided they'd put the same engineering effort into a 'lisp machine' as they did Haswell, would there be any inherent advantages or things that could be done differently?
yeah, i was going to call it `hashcat` -- maybe i should do that. or `pipehash`.
I work in Erlang and love it, but I would make the friendly argument that Erlang is really distinct (and special) even among the FP languages for a number of reasons. I always had the impression that Erlang was functional to support the guarantees made by the runtime rather than for ideological reasons. Some of the Functionistas I've run into seem to reject it out of hand for not being Haskell, but as a C guy I find it freaking amazing for writing stuff that has to stay running all the time. I guess I use in spite of it being functional rather than because of it, but it feels like I'm getting good value even when I run into things that are a pain in the ass to do functionally (which is not super often).
I've seen it put as "steelmanning" an argument, as the opposite of a strawman. A strawman misrepresents the opposing argument to make it weaker; a steelman interprets an argument as strongly as possible before refuting it.

At the very least, I try to phrase feedback as "this is awesome; I particularly like the ability to ... and the approach addressing .... I think it would help to also ...", or similar statements that make it clear what's good before commenting on what could be improved.
Firmware generally is software isn't it?
Structure of the Data Center of TIER 3 Level
Since "you can happily go fuck yourself" is not in fact an argument, the principle of charity does not demand that you interpret it as anything more than a rude interjection. At its strongest, it would require you to assume that the commenter was legitimately upset and deeply invested in the argument, which would perhaps keep you from responding in kind.
Apple is using some of the bits in a normal 64 bit pointer for other purposes, something that's been done in production Lisps for a long time, no later than when the Vax appeared with its byte addressed pointers. E.g. a valid 32 bit pointer has the 2 LSB bits as zero, allowing for 3 other values and all sorts of tricks with them.

By comparison, the CADR Lisp machine had a 32 bit word size, with 8 bits used for tags, and the remaining 24 bits used for immediate data or as a word addressed pointer. The lowRISC project proposes to add tag bits taken from other regions of memory that are fetched into a tag cache, and promoted as additional bits in the L2 and L1 caches and above. So starting with the L2 cache words will be internally 66 bits long.
> Comments

There's certainly a base element of comments that should be independent of who you're replying to - you should reply to the comment, not the person. But one of the joys of HN is getting to interact with really interesting people. When you know a person's background, you can reply to them a little more fully.

This plays out all the time around well-known HN members. When people reply to patio11's comments, for example, you can often see that some people know who he is and some don't. Sure, we know him to a large degree from his comments, but we also know him from the work he does.

I'd love to be able to click on links in profiles because it would make it a little easier to check out people's work. I only visit profiles of people who make interesting comments; interesting comments tend to be made by people who are unlikely to include spam links in their profiles -> I'm not too worried about spammy links in profiles.

But I don't run HN, and I trust them to make decisions like this with the best interests of the community in mind.
Introduction to NVMe Technology
That actually came from the original C2 Wiki, although it's been refactored (across sites apparently...it's now on MeatBall) significantly since I first came across it c. 2003:

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AssumeGoodFaith

I suspect it's a much older idea than that, probably dating back to the Enlightenment. It's closely related to the Principle of Charity, which was coined in 1958 but again, refers to a much older principle of logical discourse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity
Trolls exist on HN, I assure you. They're not scared off by the simplicity of the layout.
I experimented more - I was very junior back then, so I had a lot to learn. I didn't really have anything to do with the decision making.
Could you answer my question about how you would feel (what emotions you would experience) in a similar circumstance?
Looking forward to your attempt to sidestep crypto. I'll wait while we exhaust the entropy of the universe in a futile attempt to "spoof" a vehicle checking in.
I don't know about that, I think it's an increasingly small minority who have been calling out recent PC submissions and ideas.
It's easy to con the algorithms now with a fake news story because such fake news stories are extremely rare and not worth programming against. If such stories were common the people who run these programs would update the to better reflect how the real world was working and your ability to profit against them using this strategy would go away.
That's not a bad idea. I just priced it out and it comes to around $60 per month. Much cheaper, except now I need to pick up the cost of New Relic or an equivalent service.
No, the Apple MacBook Is Not a '4-year Step Backward'
I wonder what the "lisp machine" would look like today (i.e., given today's knowledge of the execution of rewriting in the lambda calculus).

Would it actually still make sense to make a dedicated design?
The Mad Scientist of Bicycles
I think this is very cool. However, I wish that it could be framed in a context of strategy at the game. For example, knowing that I can influence the behavior is only the first step for me to know how I can exploit it for profit.

When is it advantageous to force a barrel drop?
Where are all the US/Canada demo parties? I moved from Finland and I sorely miss the active scene there.
This might work if enforcement had any chance whatsoever of being enforced fairly, and not just another club the staff and the already-karma-rich can use to harass people who don't see the world as they do. Is it gratuitously negative for me to point out that, in the entire history of moderation systems on forums like these, that has never happened? Here's what I really expect will happen, based on thirty-plus years' experience online.

* Comments that are insightful and informative overall, and recognized by the community for being so, will still get dinged for one poor choice of phrase.

* Comments that are critical of anything outside the already-obvious zeitgeist, but worded passive-aggressively enough that their actual gratuitous negativity and chilling effect can be explained away, will get a pass.

This will have less of an effect on negativity than on diversity of opinion.
I disagree. A lot of HN's character and culture are a result of how unmodern/unconventional it is.

For example, not being able to get reply updates by email means you have to come back to the site to check, for example. Is that good or bad? I don't know the answer, but it selects a different audience. A modern HN would be a different HN community and culture.
> Downvotes will happen regardless of how well reasoned your argument is

Some will, but its very rare that I've seen posts retain a net of negative moderation when they contribute substantially, regardless of the side of an issue they are on (though I've seen controversial-but-substantial comments quickly get heavily downvoted before recovering.)

And I've seen this on every side of issues -- often to opposing posts in the same discussion -- so I don't think its an "echo-chamber" effect, but more that certain topics bringout more kneejerk negative responses from people on either side.

(Its funny that, in regard to accusations of HN being an echo chamber or hivemind, I've seen various posters proclaim with confidence that it was -- and that that hivemind was, variously, liberal, leftist, libertarian, capitalist, pro-corporate, anti-corporate, and in support or opposition to various companies, and any of a number of other things. I think people are way to quick to equate some people disagreeing with or downvoting their posts to HN being a hivemind biased against them.)
I agree.

The words "confidential informant" are prominent in the FBI press release. Almost to the point of being silly, e.g. "yet another confidential informant". Historically that has already been abused by law enforcement. Pervasive indiscriminate electronic surveillance will only make things worse.

I wish NSA, CIA, NRO et al would do useful things with all the billions they're spending. E.g. where is Malaysia Airlines Flight 370? Keeping track of airplane movements would IMO be a much more productive use of their resources than much of what they're currently doing.
> Twitter using Scala and they ended up completely backing away from it. Yikes.

What are you talking about, I just searched and found zero supporting sources
It is cynicism, maybe, but I wouldn't call it shallow or even unwarranted.
That's not true any more. The brakes can be killed remotely with software.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/car-hacked-on-60-minutes/

More info on Security Now episode 497 if you are interested in hearing the security devs being interviewed.
>Yes but I think that the "value prop" with Haskell is that it forces everyone to abide to a certain discipline with respect to type safety and immutability.

Thanks, to a large number of extensions with questionable utility, it's very easy to write not only unmaintainable code, but just unreadable code.

>Relative to what/whom? All the projects you have quoted are really successful and directly or indirectly pushed mainstream software engineering forward (i.e safer style).

They aren't safer style. They are more related to math than to programming. I believe, they could have benefitted from being implemented in more mainstream language than Haskell.
What the heck is a fluidic writer doing in this haunt of logic? Wonderful to stumble across your ologies; keep churning, spurning, turning the logos as you see fit, my friend.
That's a really good idea; you shouldn't just be able to restate the opposing argument as a devil's advocate, you should be able to understand all the arguments well enough to make them as effectively as any advocate. And you shouldn't sound like a caricature of that position unless all advocates of that position sound equally ridiculous.
> That actually came from the original C2 Wiki

That's fascinating! Has anyone traced it to its precise origin there? I'd love to see that.
That's not necessarily true -- I think you could very convincingly argue that a secure Truecrypt is more valuable than some number of Watsi patients. What if Truecrypt allows a journalist to expose some corruption that saves or benefits some equivalent number of lives?

By allocating resources you are implicitly deciding that the target of your allocation is the most important thing to allocate your resources towards. I don't see how this could not be the case.
No, they merely need to be substantive.
A really good way to be awful at calculus is to not understand real analysis but you have to draw a line at some point. (heh)
The EFF isn't against regulations on cars. They're against companies using the DMCA to restrict access. There are no regulations - that's precisely the point of the article.
Worth noting that it's illegal to modify a firearm in certain ways, but other ways are totally legal. Which relates back to the distinction between laws that prevent modification vs. laws that enforce safety standards. It's not OK to modify a semi-automatic rifle to be fully-automatic, the same way it's not OK to exploit security holes in your car computer's firmware. However, it's not OK to swap out your car computer's firmware entirely, but it is OK to swap out the barrel, upper, lower, or whatever on your weapon, provided it's certified for sale.
Some tips:

If you write a response, before sending it go back through and edit it, think about removing unneeded negativity now that you have a fully fleshed post.

If your post starts with "No." or "You're wrong." consider removing those and just letting your argument stand on its own.

Consider using softer and more charitable words like "mistaken" instead of "wrong". Usually that's what is meant in most cases anyway.

Avoid the backdoor route to building a strawman, don't add unspecified details or intensity to a post that isn't there. Doing so makes it easier to get on a high horse, but usually that isn't warranted. Get used to having a genial exchange of views with a slight difference of opinion, it's not necessary for every "argument" to be a fight to the death.

Try to read posts by others more charitably, and take the time to apologize for mistakes you've made or times you've let your emotions get the better of your reason.

Upvote comments you disagree with that are well made and lead to a good discussion.
Killing the brakes on a car would require mechanical interference/sabotage, not just software hacking.

Aside from the exceptions snuxoll mentioned, I can think of two ways the brakes could be hijacked on a car with traditional hydraulic brakes in order to cause a crash.

The first is abusing the antilock brake system to render the brakes less effective. Instead of reducing braking power when the wheels lock, it could be programmed to reduce braking power as much as possible in the event of panic braking at high speed.

The second is to abuse the stability control system now mandated by law to be included on new cars in the US and many other jurisdictions to induce, rather than prevent/correct a skid. Stability control works by selectively applying the brakes on different wheels. Applying one front brake at a moderate level (not enough to lock the wheel and leave rubber on the road as evidence) would look just like an erroneous steering input to anyone investigating a crash as long as the tampering couldn't be detected electronically. For extra evil, use GPS or have an observer trigger it manually when the car reaches a location in which a sudden turn would result in an especially bad crash.
Generous interpretations raise discourse. Because they're attempts to find strong versions of positions.

However, it takes two to tango; worthwhile discussion is a cooperative venture. There's systematic reasons why a forum is incapable of reaching a certain level. Take Twitter and misogyny. (Or HN for that matter; Twitter's rampant death threats shouldn't lower expectations when evaluating other forums.)
That's what happened with GCC and EGCS. Tired from GCC's slow development, some developers created the EGCS fork. After a couple years, the EGCS fork became the official FSF GCC. A detailed history is here:

http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/history_of_gcc_d...
>Google's Ganeti? Microsoft's Bond?

Only 2 known products for 20+ years of being widely known and available is unimpressive.