skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A Biotech Startup Wants to Replace Your Eyeballs with Synthetic Ones
The filtering done in this article is actually run on the server, not the client.
I'm not trying to approach them for dating.
SICP in Middle School! who are you ? Please start working on fusion if you are not already.
The Bot Bubble
Lots of people don't get it, and thus aren't fans.

It seems like lots of people in the functional community are fans.

I spent some time trying to get it, and I got part of it, but I'm not yet a fan.
Vivado is good and bad. Vivado's schematic and device views are much better than the earlier FPGA Editor et al. The interface for adding Chipscope debug signals is quite nice.

However there are lingering bugs. The hardware manager crashes a lot if you don't handle your debug nets carefully. My colleague had an issue with constraint priority. I _think_ I've encountered an issue with VHDL synthesis being incorrectly cap-sensitive, but I never bothered to make certain.

Overall it's getting there. The Zynq stuff is neat (once you understand what's going on) but I have some misgivings about the push toward IP cores.
Tips for learning advanced math (or CS, physics etc.) while in HS?
Someone on another thread said this:

>On the other hand, if you treat each page, each statement as something you have to completely internalize before moving onto the next page—including looking up all the prerequisite topics recursively on Wikipedia or in other texts—you might just end up teaching yourself up to college-level math while still in high school.

What other things would you recommend?
And what things would you have made it a point to learn in HS if you could go back?
What are some good sources for "the usual subjects"?

(Also, I'm okay with spending a lot of time on this. I already do math for a few hours every day, so it's not a problem.)
The New ?. Operator in C# 6
Netflix is well on its way to becoming the first of the 21st century "networks". When you think about a television network it plays re-runs of old shows, re-runs of old movies, movies that have come out of theatres, and original series.

The only difference between Netflix and say "TNT" or "FOX" (other than they don't have news shows) is that the content is available on your schedule, not the networks, and they don't put advertisements in their content they just charge you a monthly fee to have access to it.

They have, nominally 60M subscribers[1] world wide, and 40M in the US[2], out of a total of 113M TV households [3]. If half of their subscribers watched the series Daredevil (which I recommend) that would be the equivalent of Netflix getting a 20 rating. [4] That would be equivalent to a Seinfeld [ibid] which was NBC's hottest show for a very long time.

So what that means is that networks need to either adapt to this new model or die. And the more that die, the more content there is for folks like NetFlix.

Oddly enough, this sort of makes Roku the new Comcast :-)

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurengensler/2015/01/20/netflix...

[2] http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/netflix-tops-57-million...

[3] http://www.tvb.org/media/file/Nielsen_2014-2015_DMA_Ranks.pd...

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen_ratings#Commercial_rati...
So, let's say you're in Germany running a blog. You've made a few questionable image choices and now the people owning the images decides they want to be a dick and come after you for royalties. What's your exposure here? Is it something where all you need to do is take the infringing content down and that's the end of it? Or are you potentially on the hook for monetary damages going all the way back to where you first published the images?

Don't tell me that that's a question for a lawyer, because you should know about the risks regularly taken in your industry that can produce outsized penalties. You don't become a surgeon without the understanding that surgical malpractice could ruin your career, even though it almost never happens. If you don't know, you're just being naive.

Even if you did potentially have that liability, what's the likelihood that they'll actually exercise it? Sure, the US Government will want to retain as many rights as they can, but realistically they don't really give a shit unless you make them give a shit. If your clients are putting space images up in the service of saying that the US is horrible and should be boycotted or whatever, absolutely you'll have poked a hornet's nest and they're going to assign a bureaucrat the job of making your life hell.

But if you use the damn gifts you were given in the spirit in which they're given, do you really need to let fear guide your choices here?
Thanks for pointing out. I am not an alpha user so can't use it. Few months back when I deployed, this feature didn't even exist.
Yahoo-Microsoft search deal: Official details published
For me, the residential streets were even pretty cool. There was some great graffiti art, lots of Mexican food available, etc. I found a good comic bookstore to get something for my daughter. Overall, it's a pretty nice walk.
Looks like memristors are still coming, but now pushed back to 2018. They have actually built them however so they aren't complete vaporware.
XLoveCam Token Hack Generator 2015 No Survey
Language changes dramatically over time. Read English from 1000 years ago! There is a great example in "The Language Instinct" which shows a writing in English from 4 different periods in time. The oldest will make non sense to modern English speakers.
Where it kicks in is code like this:

... &p[1].foo ...
for (int i = 0; i < ...; i++) {
bar += p[0].foo;
}

The compiler wants to transform the loop as follows:

auto tmp = p[0].foo;
for (int i = 0; i < ...; i++) {
bar += tmp;
}

Assume that the compiler cannot prove that the loop will execute at least once. Now observe that this transformation is correct if and only if the pointer p is dereferenceable (with the offset of the field foo applied). The optimization would miscompile a perfectly valid program if p were NULL and the loop ran zero times. And because of strict-aliasing rules, the only way that p would not be dereferenceable in this way is if it were NULL or one element beyond the end of an array.

So the compiler wants to prove that p is not NULL upon entry to the loop. And in this program, it can--because of the address computation, the behavior is undefined if p is NULL or one element beyond the end of an array. Therefore, the compiler can safely assume that p is not NULL and perform the loop invariant code motion. In this program, it can only do so thanks to the rule about undefined behavior in address computations.

Note that I'm not aware of any compiler that actually does this, because the C++ standard committee seems to consider this undefined behavior an oversight in the spec (per the discussion linked there). But the OP successfully argues that it could, per a lawyer-y reading of the spec.

Edit: Argh, I missed the case in which p was one element beyond the end of an array. Updated.
Hi, not relevant to the topic. I visited your site, specifically "Homepage > Show all categories > Crypto" (http://golangtoolbox.com/categories/crypto) and was met with:

"template: views/layout:views/categories/show:1:301: executing "views/categories/show::main" at <.CurrentUser.Id>: nil pointer evaluating interface {}.Id"

Happens when viewing any category. Looks like a useful site though.
The only model of personality taken seriously by academics at present is the five factor model [1].

It's well researched, the traits were not 'designed', rather the traits popped out of linguistic analysis and statistics, and it's stable across different populations and over most of a person's lifetime.

There is an open test called the IPIP Neo which has either 120 or 300 questions, which you can take online [2].

If you're really interested in what is being taught these days about the theory, this is a good set of lectures take takes you from the early theory of personality through to what is considered science today [3].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

[2] http://www.personal.psu.edu/~j5j/IPIP/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQAhrMCQUa6s...
There are multiple startup ideas in that article.
Show HN: Xnote; helps you save, annotate and share articles.
How Big Is Space – Interactive Version
Memory Management in Linux – C Source Code
> MBTI is one model of how psychology works

So is astrology.
Project Spartan – a Browser
Darwinism dwindling
That's such a Virgo thing to say.
You can also use collectd nginx module along with nginx stub-status module to gather some useful metrics.
I wonder how my being considered(I use that term loosely due to said unscientificness of the exam) ENFJ makes me fit into this :)
One of my favorite insights I've heard is that the present came from just a tiny part of the past.
Specific questions/comments can be emailed to stormharding a t ruggedinbox.com
It's based on solid science you sniping twerp. Feel free to not 'believe' in statistics if you like. There's a club down the road for anti-vaxxers while you're at it.
Glenn Gould inspires Apple workers today just as he did Steve Jobs
The interesting thing to me is that people say that the MBTI is junk pseudoscience, that the Big-5 (OCEAN) model is the only scientifically valid personality test...but then take a look at the correlation coefficients between the MBTI and 4 out of the 5 dimensions of the OCEAN model:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indic...

A correlation of 0.7+ is huge in the social sciences - it's significantly more than the correlation between say intelligence and genetics. If I look at the numbers, my interpretation is that the MBTI is largely measuring 4 out of the 5 dimensions of the OCEAN model, but leaves Neuroticism out of the model.
Researchers slam Telegram app's “visual fingerprint” security
Either I'm missing something here or the article is correct. Generally, the first dimension of a matrix corresponds to the rows and the second dimension to the columns. So in the original figure, A is m x k, B is k x n, and C is m x n, and this seems right. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_%28mathematics%29#Size
Astrology's a fun model to think about too. I wouldn't necessarily want to make predictions about an individual's behavior from it, but then, if I could actually predict an individual's behavior I'd rule the world.
Download iOS 8.2 beta 2 for iPhone,iPad,iPod
"Why the Myers-Briggs test is totally meaningless"

http://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personalit...

"There's just no evidence behind it," says Adam Grant, an organizational psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania who's written about the shortcomings of the Myers-Briggs previously. "The characteristics measured by the test have almost no predictive power on how happy you'll be in a situation, how you'll perform at your job, or how happy you'll be in your marriage."
I am very glad I don't work with this man. This essay really makes me grateful for working with pretty chill people.

We should have better sorting mechanisms so he can work with like-minded people and I can avoid them. I don't say his style is "bad", but it doesn't fit my style.

Which is not to deny he says some valid and interesting things - like the high proportion of emotionally damaged people in tech. But the proper response to this is to work extra hard at bridging the gap with your fellow geeks when they are behaving badly.

I've only seen a few toxic people in more than a decade of tech; I suspect this guy is characterizing many normal people as toxic.
Could be that we answer ambiguous questions differently, not that we have different personality traits.

Still, I've noticed that there is a bias in the general workplace against people who are perceived to be introverts, and so I answer ENTJ if asked, which has only happened a couple of times.
So, where is the evidence that it is a handy first approximation? That is, that it makes any kind of testable predictions? Even if they don't always hold, there should be some correlations with some kind of quantifiable metric. So what quantifiable metrics to these personality categories correlate with?
Ok I'll give my 2 cents now, thanks for all of your answers everyone.

Imho they're purposely incoveniencing small-time shoppers, in an effort to increase each shopper's purchase amount.

If you're constantly met with 5-10 minute wait times at the checkout, you're going to make sure that it's worth it (by buying a lot of items).

They probably see multiple efficiencies by customers purchasing 20+ items at once and wish to keep it that way.

With 20 or more checkout lines in most stores, I can't really justify why they wouldn't dedicate at least one to 10 items or less.

I thought about this the other day when I was contemplating going in just to get a tub of baking soda. I didn't pull the trigger. I'll go back when I have at least 10 or 20 things I really need to stock up on.

I agree with jotux though, a single queue would really be the best of both worlds imho. They get their efficiences with the big buyers, and everybody gets through the line at the same (faster) rate.
I used to argue with this the conclusions of the author, as presented to me by other people older and wiser than myself. But I had to learn from experience that I was wrong and the author is right. I thought I was smarter than everyone else who told me to moderate and that you become what you put in your body, but I wasn't.
China has a ratio of 112:100 men to women at birth due to gender selectivity. It's that women outlive men which brings things into 'balance' if you include all ages.

Never the less, you see increased bride imports from impoverished SEAsian neighbors. There is also great pressure on the males to show how meritorious and deserving they are economically, in 'attracting' a mate. I say attracting in quotes, because it's often more disproportionately economic than romantic attraction.
The World Record for the Shortest Math Article: 2 Words
Ryan Dahl – the history of node
Content is king and Gates was right: http://www.craigbailey.net/content-is-king-by-bill-gates/

Content is where I expect much of the real money will be made on the Internet, just as it was in broadcasting.

The television revolution that began half a century ago spawned a number of industries, including the manufacturing of TV sets, but the long-term winners were those who used the medium to deliver information and entertainment.

When it comes to an interactive network such as the Internet, the definition of “content” becomes very wide. For example, computer software is a form of content-an extremely important one, and the one that for Microsoft will remain by far the most important.

But the broad opportunities for most companies involve supplying information or entertainment. No company is too small to participate.
> whereby Bronze Age proto-druid ceremonial headgear leads to Gandalf's hat.

Or, more likely, vice versa, given the end of the Third Age was far before 1000 BC.
Mother of austistic child develops ‘universal language’ app
I also think astrology is fun. In my experience it yields better results than MBTI - which is one reason why I think very poorly of MBTI.
Another psychological bias exploitable by Free To Play games?

As an added bonus, if items A..E can be randomly obtained on equal probability, getting the last item is harder then instinct suggest. Thus, "Complete Gacha" lead to 1k $ spends.
Every time I login to pay my Xfinity bill, I pause, because their website looks like a carbon copy of Netflix.
Moral: Should answer INTJ whenever a recruiter searching for a "ninja/rockstar" developer asks my MBTI type.
"Meanwhile, the two biggest telecom companies, AT&T and Verizon, have survived by transforming themselves into software companies, partnering with Apple and other smartphone makers."

It's quite a stretch to call AT&T and Verizon's dominance based on "software". It's actually more than a stretch, it's simply wrong. Those two companies are dominant (to this day, 4 years later) not because of software but despite their desperate and failing attempts to be relevant in the software world. The dominance is quite simply the result of a monopoly on physical resources, in this case, frequencies and large-scale cell tower infrastructure that's hard to copy without huge new investments in ... ahem... hardware.
I guess there is another, very big reason:
The Non-US markets.

The US is surely important, but Netflix has launched in Europe and faces a huge obstacle that very few US Americans know about - rights licensing is far worse.

Selling content overseas is a huge business, which means a giant time delay until something makes it to, say, Germany (even if not dubbed). Which worked in the past, but the Internet is forcing real time usage, see the piracy numbers worldwide for something like Game of Thrones (HBO, I know). There is practically no legal way to easily consume something like GoT the same time as it is aired in the US.

Not so for Netflix' own content.

House of Cards, Daredevil - all already available globally.

The world is a big place and Netflix is going after it, the US is just one market.

That HBO/Apple TV deal better be global soon.
Whoosh!

By the way, the MBTI has been shown to correlate strongly with the NEO/big5 so your very negative comment is exposed as one of those typical HN negative comments.

MBTI is still the most used personality system even though it isn't empirically keyed. The main issue with this research, however, is that the MBTI tests are often subpar. I won't trust these results unless they tell which test they administered.
Extensive prior discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9407439
In the same breath developers will espouse the benefits of TDD, Agile, and the abject failure of Waterfall, that language X is on the up and up and that technology Y improved their team's productivity with absolutely no evidence to back it up, and we all go along with it.

Yet when this topic comes up, we get all the 'pah, not science' comments, some with significant amounts of vitriol.

When everyone is a special snowflake and anyone can make it big if they work hard enough (both of which are false), and programming is a pop culture, I'm not surprised.
A quote from my comment above:

> I believe most people on HN are aware extremists represent a small percentage of the total populations.

I stand by my decision to assume that most people here are smart enough to know the difference. Key word is most people clearly...
The post cites the spec. The C standard clearly seems to state that & must reference "an object", and NULL does not reference an object. A "pointer to any object" is distinguished from a null pointer.

Do you have links stating otherwise?
Code might not live forever. So what? It's not supposed to.

I'd be disturbed if something better didn't eventually replace what we are currently are doing. Evolution. The progressive succession of organisms. Unless you are a horseshoe crab your species is probably just a flash in the pan and a rung on a ladder.

I consider myself less an architect and more a cook. The nutrition is provided and the meal enjoyed, but then people go on their way. The meal is gone, but the effects provided echo in time forever.
Ever read the book Going Postal? I thought it would be about using pieces of clothing or other accessories to get people to trust you more.
Hi. I would like to personally say that the guy who is posting on this statement is a complete dumb ass

Personal attacks are not allowed on HN.
So negativity is fine on HN as long as it's 'passive agressive' and 'sarcastic', got it!

EDIT: By the way I wasn't talking about the MBTI, if you care to read the thread. Try reading instead of skimming next time.
From the article: "Last year, Intel spent $11 billion on research and development and another $10 billion to update the chip factories."
Netflixs growth forced the issue. Cable can't run on original, first run content alone. There is so much content that is on Netflix that it doesn't matter that it is all reruns.

Netflix would destroy the networks but also their main suppliers.

That is why Netflix is going into original content. If they won't fund it nobody will.
$120k Designer, 25yrs old, 6 years experience. I work for a SF startup but I work remotely 75% of the time from Berlin. I did a Diploma of design & a B.Comp Sci.
> I'm not sure what ChuckMcM was trying to argue.

If you create a circuit board which has all of the same chips as someone else, if you've changed the layout, you are completely within your rights to sell it as your own and keep all the money.

However, if you copy firmware, then creating a circuit board with the copied firmware is a copyright violation and you can be found guilty of copyright infringement at most of our trading partners.

For folks who built cloned CPU boards with a copyrighted BIOS they re-implemented the BIOS in a clean room to have their own "work alike" version, which then gave them the right to sell their boards.

If however you copy an FPGA bitstream, which is the compiled output of a copyrighted HDL description, you're in violation. But building a 'clean room' implementation of an FPGA bitstream is generally infeasible as it requires you to both know how the manufacturer encodes and encrypts it, and all of the functions of the internal chip.

A really great example of this in action was that the recent flap over "clone" FTDI USB to serial chips, wasn't a clone of the chip at all. Instead the cloners used an ARM M0 CPU with a USB peripheral and a UART peripheral and a bit of code that responded in all of the same ways in which the FTDI chip (which was presumably an ASIC) responded. That 'workalike' implementation was only possible because the set of inputs and outputs for that system are constrained, and the only IP violation was the re-use of FTDI's VID/PID pair. If they had been forced to use a bitstream file for an FPGA they would be liable for up to $30,000 per copy, and jail.
Huh, I guess I should look into it more.
I haven't really read enough to have an informed opinion, but what if INTJs are just the type most likely to spend their free time taking the test.

I'm an ENTJ by the way, but these tests are really hard for me to take because I always end up being influenced by what I want the result to be.
> It's nice to know that the other people watching a show are also at the same point as you are (or relatively close), allowing you to speculate on what might happen next in the time between episodes.

The shared cultural experience is nice, but utterly foreign to those of us outside the US, where the discussion arrives weeks, months, or even years before the show.
Subscribe or Login to read?

"ain't nobody got time for that!"
>WSJ: Hold up. How can I get a free plane upgrade?

> MR. HADNAGY: Airports are always stressful. These ladies are always getting yelled at. If we make someone happy before we can ask for a free upgrade, that could work.

So now the question is: how do you make the agent happy enough to give you an upgrade? Just be polite?
I dunno, I'd love to be able to pay Home Depot $10/month and just have them deliver any tool I want whenever I want it. Obviously streaming movies don't put wear and tear on the movie, but I found the earlier poster's analogy (now deleted) rather attractive.
I have two cousins who are cowboys. There is no such reference to "cattle handler" west of the mississippi so far as I know.

And as I said, I haven't often prevailed in such arguments, but the question I have for you, is what are you doing to not make women and girls uncomfortable in our industry?

I think this argument has gone off the rails with the bit about dresses, periods, and giving birth.
I would suppose that at the point we understand biology well enough to beat aging and death, overcoming the "ratchet" DNA degeneration mentioned in the article will be pretty trivial.