skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks - it sounds like California and Chicago both have Caps that aren't currently being enforced. Makes sense.

What I'd love to see in California is AT&T roll out G.Fast in all the U-Verse neighborhoods (It's already in a lot of places). A single DSLAM (over whatever they put in those little huts), can cover about 750 homes within 500m, and that gives you a 100 mbits/sec on a single pair of copper.
I interviewed for a software job there twice. It seemed pretty dysfunctional to me. For one project, they had 20 people working on something that I thought would take 3-5 people.
If you're curious, here is an optimizing assembler.

https://code.google.com/p/mao/
The Unbundling of Everything
There's more than a couple situations where Swift forces you to repeat yourself. No default implementations for protocols and missing language features for dealing with enums would probably be more prominent examples than this narrow availability of default arguments problem.

I'm not sure any one of these "work in progress" related issues are a reason to "hate Swift" (or at least, where Swift is going). It's more a reason to hate the current status of Swift as a project – since it will probably be a year or two before these sorts of non-critical issues bubble to the top of the Swift development team's priority list.
Seconded regarding his cover on popsci. You have to admire his knack for self promotion.
Silly window syndrome was fixed in TCP around 1983. Unless someone really botches a TCP implementation, it should not be a problem today.

The article has a section "Sender SWS Avoidance and Nagle's Algorithm" and claims that they're related. They're not, except that in some sense they're duals. Silly window syndrome occurs when the pipe is almost full and the reading end is making tiny reads. The tinygram problem, which is addressed by Nagle's Algorithm, occurs when the pipe is almost empty and the writing end is making tiny writes. Silly window syndrome is easy to fix, because doing tiny reads from a full pipe doesn't mean the sender has to be informed immediately that there's space for a tiny bit of new data. The receiver doesn't send a window update until there's some serious space available. But tiny writes on an empty pipe come up often in practice, and senders want their tiny data items delivered promptly, so tinygram prevention can't be as heavy-handed.

(A long time ago, when TCP was being designed, I used to have to worry about this stuff. John Nagle)
This feels pretty scummy and very much like spam. Is there now an affiliate money-making component to getting people to signup for udemy courses? When did udemy pivot from MOOCs to selling lynda.com like content courses?
I really need to write a matrix multiply and see what code Rust generates.
How 1-Year-Olds Figure Out the World
> My point isn't about the standard. It's about selective enforcement.

Then you're trying to fix the end that isn't broken. The problem is not that people are objecting to bad behavior in the one case, it's that they're not objecting in the other.

> I think that can be done poorly, but I think it's a generally useful first-pass heuristic.

So is not interviewing black job applicants because they are more likely to have received a poor education. But we ought not to do that because the heuristic is often wrong and the individuals have no ability to control what box you put them in when it is.
This is a very odd post. It basically boils down to default arguments only work on named functions, they don't work on function values (whether this is a curried function, or a declared value of function type). Which seems like a perfectly reasonable restriction to me; default argument values are a property of named functions, not of function types, and cannot be expressed in the type system. While it's not out of the realm of possibility for Swift to extend the type system to support this, it's not something I'd hold my breath for and it's not something I feel that I could rightly criticize Swift for not having. And yet, the author declares "Now, you hate Swift" based on this one perceived limitation.
My impression is that this headline was made to sound like Numenta is a step on the way to the singularity, when it fact it's one of many companies working on machine learning techniques, the key difference being the founders have good resumes.

Biologically inspired engineering is a great thing, but to say something is a model of the neocortex in a meaningful way is a claim no one deserves to make in 2015.

I see a lot of patents for HTM, but have there been any peer reviewed publications from Numenta?

Jeff Hawkins himself states "HTM does not present any new idea or theory, but combines existing ideas to mimic the neocortex with a simple design that provides a large range of capabilities". Ok got it. Nothing wrong with competing on implementation and engineering.

So regarding that implementation, how are they doing against competitors in their space?
Are you sure? Has there been a study done on inventions/patents to know how many are that useful? For instance, if I come up with a, I dunno, a coffee filter that's 2% more effective, sure I've invented something. But I might not make any money ever because a 2% efficiency increase is irrelevant for non-industrial-scale things, generally. (Or maybe that 2% gain costs 5% more.) So maybe a lot of people are just inventing "stuff" that while technically an invention, isn't really that useful, business acumen or not.
Why? Because new laws apply when you are the dominant player in the market. Biasing the search would be "tying"[1] if the bias is related to another market Google participates in.

See the Sherman/Clayton antitrust acts and the long list of related SCOTUS rulings.
So just wait around and hope? Whyever would one commit to such a random, unlikely path? Perhaps finding a good mentor is not easy, and chance often plays a role in us finding such relationships (also true for friends, mates, and other non-mentor relationships). But to expect chance to provide? Not an actionable plan, IMO.
Power Shift in America as Wall Street Bows to Silicon Valley
http://www.michevan.id.au/content/sit-stand-desk/

Motorised sit/stand desk with three 24" monitors. I mostly work remotely from home, so this is my home/work/office space where I spend far too much time. Run ArchLinux with KDE as my desktop.
'doomed' , really?

we are in an epic financial bubble right now that DWARFS all previous bubbles of the past 20 years so much so that janet yellen herself said "cash is not a good store of value"; meaning the bubble is so big that those who created and sustain it with unlimited cash are so scared of it popping that they will publicly allude to the possibility of unending limitless printing ( and the inevitable hyperinflationary boom it would conclude with ) .

all of the self congratulatory lying and self deception of silicon valley is that it is 'libertarian' and 'independent' , when in fact ALL THE NEW MONEY IN SILICON VALLEY COMES FROM THE FED THROUGH EITHER BANKS OR THE TREASURY BY WAY OF VC AND THE MILITARY RESPECTIVELY.

the boom will end as all booms do and the headline of what 'doomed' makerbot will seem like a joke.

laying off 20% isn't 'doom' by any stretch of the imagination.

if there are problems with makerbots business model, then they were relegated to the parent company which now owns it.

bri pettis is a political genius for ousting his 2 compatriots and keeping the control, and the spoils of the buyout , all for himself.
I'm curious about that as well, some people have bet it's gonna be a mix of open hardware and proprietary (even if just by code) "governors", something the newest launch, the solo (http://3drobotics.com/solo/), would be well-equipped to do (I haven't done the research to confirm/deny that yet).
Just got a taz 5 a few days ago. Been really impressed with them. I still don't have the bed fully level but the PEI surface has been wonderful compared to everything else i've ever used. it's like it's a completely different kind of machine. I looked at them for the same reason, open source but they really deliver on the actual product. my only complaint is one i'm going to fix myself if i can't find any other way. the LCD is bright at night when printing in the dark.
> Google is patently a search monopoly right now

No. Bing is a click away and provides comparable results. A monopoly occurs when the consumer has no choice but the monopolist. That's clearly not the case here.
This is an interesting perspective with which I am currently inclined to disagree. Could you provide more rationale to justify the idea that nonviolent crimes should be punished more severely than violent crimes?
> It creates a terrible cycle, where they have legitimate reasons not to want to seek support from their environment (they have real reason to distrust it), but where they can't function without the support of their environment as well.

It took years before I started to realize this was the case for me, particularly the 2nd part. So many things I never could find even a correlation for slowly started to "click" for me. The way you put it helps a lot, I haven't been able to describe it to anyone. Thanks :)
I remember when I switched from TheDraw to the amazing new technology of RIPScript, which was like some insanely convoluted svg precursor, but allowed for some pretty metal vector graphix loading screens. http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/library/PROGRAMS/GRAPHICS/RIPS...

Then about five years ago I started switching all my web development away from pngs and gifs to svgs. The more things change...
Dang you are the best moderator I have seen. period. Thanks man.
plug for a friend's similar whimsical project: http://www.dayhue.com/
Do you spend time actively studying Physics, or do you just expect to be gifted with this knowledge?
As a WP enthusiast I don't fully understand/agree with the new direction.

I am hoping the Build will paint the complete picture of what Modern WP Design means in the W10 world.
That's not what I meant (e.g. Bernanke influencing Yellen), I guess I was not clear enough or the subtleties were lost in translation. The examples are simple, obvious cases of the more subtle fears one could have about public officials moving to the private sector. Influence is not by phone calls asking for things (unless you are really stupid, as Rajaratnam's circle seemed to be) but by cautious alignment of interests and game theoretic considerations (a la House of Cards). You don't ask the CFO how his company is doing; you have someone in your team take him for frequent drinks and lunches and to clubs and get to know him well, and then wait for "mosaic" pieces when he's had too much to drink...

As a more subtle example, some Austrian economists argue (and I can't remember the books off the top of my head) that Keynes' policies were influenced by what politicians and the academic elite of his era wanted to hear; this allegedly enabled Keynes to become the first "superstar" economist with significant personal advantages, in exchange for providing backing for policies that classical economists would not want to touch. (Others might argue that Keynes, as an all-but-by-name Fabian, was thus inclined in the first place and didn't need prompting.)

This is the real risk: when the interests of people close to government start influencing government actions, not necessarily outright or implicitly, but with the same effect on the stakeholders (the governed).

Without wanting to step into a hornet's nest, a more obvious recent example is the way the interests of Mr. Cheney aligned so nicely with the case for war in the Middle East a decade ago. Some argue that, even if the war was justified, the lack of any kind of open bidding process for contracting during the period would be concerning as regards the judicious use of taxpayer money.

From my relatively few and junior years in the global macro space, I didn't get a feel that Bernanke would be a particularly egregious case of this; he struck me as an honest man and competent academic (even if I'm not a fan of his policies); as for what it's worth, seemed Trichet. But it's a discussion worth having because not every departing civil servant is motivated by academic immortality or policy legacy.

Well, I never had a particularly brilliant P&L and eventually left the industry, so maybe my opinion is not worth much.
>Takeda quotes McCarthy: “I saw the sherpas fighting over who got to carry (the SNAP),” adding: “They had no idea of what it was. They’d put the thing in the middle of their tent and huddle around it. I guarantee none of them are alive now.”

I wonder if they themselves knew about the risk involved.
India to Zuckerberg: We Don't Need Your Economic Racism
BuzzFeed Says Posts Were Deleted Because of Advertising Pressure
Did you see this tool that came up on HN? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9396116

I think the general concept is sometimes called "DWIM" (Do What I Mean).
rm . * (extra space) has gotten me a few times. I bet I'm not the only one either.
Wink suffers service disruption, bricks some customers' hubs
Carlsbad desalination plant
Leaving the Body Behind: A History
I work with Codementor (https://www.codementor.io/), which provides on-demand developer mentorship for a fee. I've worked with a few dozen developers in the last few months. Many are a la carte engagements, wanting help with very specific problems or code reviews. Others are long-term recurring engagements where we meet regularly (one or more times a week) or irregularly (to work through whatever issues crop up). Some are professional developers; others are students/just getting started. I have an obvious vested interest, but the customers seem happy; both in reviews of our sessions and in direct feedback, they say I'm helping them up-level their code, techniques, and understanding. That seems exactly what a mentor should be.
Here is a similar story about service dogs trained specifically for people with PTSD. They will do things like ensure no one crowds up too close behind their human, as well as offering the emotional interaction.

http://goodmenproject.com/good-feed-blog/service-dog-helps-i...

Frikkin' awesome.
Ask HN: How does annual profit relate to company valuation?
I have been asked by a relative to help evaluate a potential acquisition. Let's say the company makes $1 million a year in profits, with less than $50,000 in annual expenses. Assuming revenues and expenses remain the same for the foreseeable future, how do we determine if the selling price is reasonable?
libtrash does this by hooking libc so it works for anything that deletes files (unless it's statically compiled...) - it's been around for ages. http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~marriaga/software/libtrash/
Can you elaborate on how someone starting a company could organize this way?
You might be able to get a kind of distributed mentor through Stack Exchange. Just post lots of questions to StackOverflow, programmers.stackexchange.com, and codereview.stackexchange.com.

Just a thought.
The definition of purity in this post isn't quite correct. The common definition (which this post seems to be using) is that a pure function is one that has no side effects. This doesn't have much of an implication for reasoning about almost-pure functions like println, which have to effects on the program execution, but do cause some distinction. For example, with a pure function, the following are equivelent:

var a=f(0); a=f(1)
a=f(1)

however, these are not the same when f=println.
I'm not that poster, but people with more power should be held to account more strictly for abusing it. While there are noteworthy exceptions, violent crimes are (generally speaking) low-leverage crimes that rarely impact more than a handful of people, whereas the ramifications of even something as "non-violent" as this sort of fraud can be significantly more harmful to much bigger groups of people.

(I am also of the opinion that corporate protections are largely bullshit and that executives and boards should be civilly and criminally liable for wrongdoings perpetuated by their companies. Probably the only way to make them act decently.)
How clearly have you stated this to the folks you were mentoring?
I think there is a big slice of perspective you're missing here.

Yes, at the higher levels of power everything is dirty.

However, you have to look at what the consequences of that are, how it manifests in a society, and how far it spreads.

And in Germany, it works pretty well. Yes, enormous government projects don't always go to the most capable or efficient. Yes, big business owners contribute to politicians, avoid taxes, and erect legal obstacles to competition that would benefit society. However, the society basically works. The corruption is not interfering with basic services to the people. A journalist can write what she wants without fear of physical reprisal. Individual property rights are by-and-large respected. School teachers actually benefit the children. Police officers don't operate as a tax force on their own behalf. Thats not the case in every country.

So while I agree with you that even the 'best' countries still have a very real battle to maintain integrity, there is absolutely a spectrum and largely, North America and Western Europe are near the top of it.
Meaning of pentesting and how pentesting word derived
How-To Guide and Survival Kit – Find Solution for Your Daily Problem
Nifty Python tricks – old but gold
3D Robotics only open source the flight controller hardware and software and ground control software. delivering a safe drone platform requires a lot more hardware (the aircraft itself, camera and radio gear) and firmware (camera, gimbal, speed controller radio gear).
The World's Most Southerly ATM: Interview with Wells Fargo's David Parker (2010)
I have two people I would call mentors.

Both of them came as products of my environment.

No one owes you a single thing, and time is the most valuable resource any of us have. The common tie I see between the two people I would call this are simple:

1. They saw I wanted to build things, could admit I was wrong, and was willing to learn

2. I kept in touch with them regardless of circumstance, seeking nothing but a hello and how are you doing.

If you want someone to just magically come along and guide you, this is the wrong path. Relationships are two sided and though you cannot offer expertise mentors often have a personal reason for investing their most precious resource into someone: They see something. Demonstrate this.
I similarly have a strong startle reflex. I hate open office spaces, and particularly office spaces where my desk has me without my back to a wall.

People moving around behind me is very stressful and distracting.

Similarly I'll never walk up behind someone and tap them on the shoulder if I can help it. I always try and come up beside them, in their eye-line and wave or say hi to get their attention.
It clearly isn't turing complete because it requires the user to input do the loop portion. If you can't loop, you can't be turing complete.
People Don’t Belong to Organizations
I never trust surveys like this - they don't weight for the novelty factor.
this is the only real use-case IMO. Multiple instances being able to read/write to a single FS. Anything less would be a disappointment.
I don't think so, though I haven’t really looked around. Want to meet over tea?
https://github.com/nupic-community/clortex
It seems like a good idea at first glance, but how would you stop a bad actor from wroughting that system?
> doesn't that mean that all new device manufacturers need to make everything difficult for law enforcement by default or else lose their ability to decide otherwise later?

I would ask why they're specifically designing their devices to make it impossible for law enforcement to collect evidence. In general, I want to be secure from people who would do me harm, and at the same time I want law enforcement to be able to bring anyone who does do me harm to justice. Preventing the police from lawfully collecting evidence shifts the burden entirely on me to defend myself and allows criminals to act without repercussion. I like to read cyberpunk, but I don't want to live it.

It's my firm opinion that it's possible to design systems that adequately secures a user's data from unauthorized access (to include both criminals and law enforcement acting without warrants) but at the same time allows access by law enforcement under lawful conditions (i.e. a warrant). When a major device manufacturer like Apple claims that the inability of law enforcement to access your data is a feature, I think that sets a very dangerous precedent. I want to make sure my data is protected from criminals; I don't want criminal evidence protected from the cops.

I'll turn the question around - is it right for a major consumer device manufacturer like Apple to decide that the police should not be able to collect evidence from their customers?
The best & key feature seems highly under-stated.

Until now, you could bind an ebs to only one instance.

Or had to use gluster / hdfs otherwise.

Multiple Amazon EC2 instances can access an Amazon EFS file system
at the same time, providing a common data source for
workloads and applications running on more than one instance.

You effectively have a distributed filesystem now. this is great news.
Yeah, it boils down to that, but there's a reason the author wrote this article, rather than a three-sentence paragraph.

His point is that this is not just a "perceived problem", but a real problem that affects regular working programmers. What's more meat-and-potatoes than HTTP requests?
I read that as Immoral Linux and immediately started thinking about what immoral actions the OS could automatically perform.
Welcome to ALIEN WEEK
headers are string -> [string]!
Greg Egan produced a good visualization of flattening a torus: https://vimeo.com/71479159
The Long Marriage of Mindfulness and Money
This is exactly the misunderstanding of antitrust laws that I was talking about. Contrary to popular belief, this is not about how much of the market a given business.

Monopoly starts to be covered by the antitrust acts when "the ability to raise prices above those that would be charged in a competitive market"[1]. Controlling a very large percentage of the market is merely one of the easier ways to demonstrate the existence of that power.

[1] United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.