skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Pharmaceuticals are the classic example of why patents are necessary. Billions of R&D to develop a product that can be produced by a competitor for pennies.

If you took more than a cursory glance at the pharmaceutical industry, you'd see this oft-repeated claim is bullshit. Pharmaceutical companies spend billions on marketing (as well as lobbying politicians and doctors) and attempting to re-patent old drugs as their patents expire. They spend very little on blue sky, highly innovative drug development. That is mainly the province of publicly funded research labs and universities.

The one thing pharmaceutical companies actually do is cover the high cost of clinical trials. I see no reason we couldn't replace that with a publicly funded mechanism, do you?
There are a lot of questions in there but I can try and answer a few:

1) Leading somewhere...

It's not really assumed they do but some speculate that they could.

2) Surface of the object/singularity/wide event horizon.

This is tricky to explain quickly and simply but here goes. In a very simple sense, a 'singularity' is really a name given to a thing which can't be explained by known laws or perhaps involves an infinity that shouldn't be able to exist in reality or some such. It's a name for a thing that by it's existance causes a 'problem' in that we an't fully explain it.

That's the layman's definition I often hear but in reality to be a singularity it needs to fit a set of criteria regarding geodesics and curvature etc that wikipedia can explain.

In the case of black holes it's used to refer to the infinitely dense mass that 'is' the black hole, or rather the point at which you'd reach if theoretically you fell all the way down to it. This isn't a small but massive object - it's an infinitely dense object.

So...there's the matter of infinitely dense. Once something loses the ability of its outward pressure of its mass etc to resist the inward crush of gravity, you get an object that becomes denser and denser and denser ad infinitum because it continuously collapses under its own gravity. It simply continues to collapse inwards on itself forever becoming 'infinitely dense' as it gets smaller and smaller.

There is no known reason why it wouldn't continue to collapse inwards on itself to an infinitely small point. There is no known reason why it would stop at the planck scale, no mechanism to suddenly overcome the immense gravity, and that's the problem really.

There is an assumption of a singularity because in order to create a 'strong' enough curvature of space-time such that light couldn't escape (i.e. to form an event horizon), you need to have a sufficiently dense object. The only way to achieve this is with an object that has collapsed past the 'point of no return' and continues to collapse in on itself (i.e you need a singularity).

Other fantastically dense objects like neutron stars lack the density, you've got to go 'super dense' and then you just get the run away effect and a singularity.
I don't think that Atmel part supports the right curve.
That still leaves us with Google, which (as far as I know) is not considered a "monopoly" by any measure of the term.

With that said...

> Microsoft's dominance of the x86-based personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly

If you read further in the paragraph you quoted, you'll find that Microsoft was specifically engaging in monopolization (i.e. the process of becoming a monopoly), which was the specific reason why it got dinged. It also states the and in there - that they had taken measures to disrupt attempts to counter their monopolization.

This analysis is consistent with the Sherman Antitrust Act (the law under which Microsoft was cited), specifically Section 2: Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]". It's also consisted with the Sherman Antitrust Act's intent, as specified by its authors (George Hoar: "... [a person] who merely by superior skill and intelligence...got the whole business because nobody could do it as well as he could was not a monopolist..(but was if) it involved something like the use of means which made it impossible for other persons to engage in fair competition.").

This isn't even mentioning the failure of the court to recognize that there were viable altneratives to Windows that, in their words, "a significant percentage of consumers world-wide could substitute for Intel-compatible PC operating systems without incurring substantial costs". GNU/Linux (which was designed for "Intel-compatible PC"s to begin with), three of the four mainstream BSDs (NetBSD, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD), OS/2, and a variety of other operating systems existed at the time of that ruling. The only way the ruling's rationale would hold true is if they interpreted "Intel-compatible" to mean "Windows-compatible", in which case the ruling is directly applicable to Apple's behavior now (since Apple - like Microsoft then - is attempting to monopolize the application ecosystem of iOS; if Microsoft can get dinged for monopolizing a specific market segment, then so can/should Apple). In this case, Apple is "attempt[ing] to monopolize" smart watches within the the iOS application market (just like how Microsoft "attempt[ed] to monopolize" browsers within the Windows application market). The difference is that Apple's attempts are much more obvious.

Disclaimer: IANAL.
Also, they don't support any kind of two-factor authentication, and have no plans to add that: https://twitter.com/AskCapitalOne/status/504679257239719938
Reputation.

We pick banks, stores and neighborhoods based on reputation. We trust some of them because they proved to be good and we don't trust others (I bet there are areas of the world and maybe of your city where you won't walk alone in the night.)

We get educated to trust according to reputation.

Personally I don't trust much Internet services because so many of them die young. I always wonder how many years any of the services I have to use for work will stay with me and how I can move my data somewhere else, in the few cases it makes sense (example: you can export Trello's data, but then what?) My customers and I use them because they are so convenient but I'm sure that sooner or later one of them will die in the middle of a project and we will be burnt. I have redmine wikis from 8 years ago. I'll have Trello's boards for the projects I'm working on now in 2022?

But I also don't trust much any "normal" company. I expect that they make their interests first, mine maybe. I buy from them but caveat emptor.
Why Python 2 over Python 3?
RISC OS on the Raspberry Pi
That's largely immaterial in the short to medium term, in the non-mobile space anyway. Intel has superior fab technology and vastly superior fab capacity, attaining parity with Intel (which would be difficult due to being behind in process technology) would still put you at a disadvantage, you'd need to be significantly better than Intel to make up for Intel's other advantages.
Great tool, but too bad it can't handle code very well.

An example (converting C++ to C):

Input:
void FileStream::write(char* , int);
void VirtualMachine::cycle(int);

Example:
void FileStream_write(char* , int);

Output:
void FileStream_write(char* , int);
void VirtualMachine_cycle(int* , );

Also, is it open-source?
I think Makefile have such pattern matching, which can be utilized to do such list transformations too.
Maybe I'm not the usual passenger, but I realized recently that it's been many years since I've been on a plane larger than a 737 -- and I fly at least once a month. Most of my flights are to/from reasonable sized but not megacities (SF, St Louis, Kansas City, Nashville, Charleston, Phoenix, etc), and since I try for direct flights, I almost always end up on Embraer 145 or 175 or similar small planes.

I think at long as gas prices aren't too high, far more passengers are going to pay a small premium for direct flights on smaller economy planes, and stay away from the 380s and 747s. I couldn't care less if I'm on a fancy plane with a video screen etc -- having to make a connection is 100x worse.
Chris Coons is a Democrat. The article didn't mention that fact.

Also, I'm not sure if this is an example of crony capitalism or not; I don't fully understand the stated motivation for the legislation. The motivation seems fishy at first blush.
Yes, you're right, sorry.

I was thinking of the courier fraud but that seems to be covered. The other version of that where they make the victim make a BACS transfer doesn't seem to be covered in the same way.
Very neat idea, and as others have said, cool animations! However, I'm not sure I buy the premise that "Social media signals can be used to give a rough picture of foot traffic around places of business," at least in general.

I can believe it for restaurants, hotels and popular hang-outs. But thinking about churches, strip clubs, the urologist, etc., I wonder if there are "blind spots" or other areas of low-quality data. Or even areas of poor cell coverage?

Maybe in most cities there are enough other places around that people frequent to cover over any blind spots? I'd be interested to know whether they've found any places like that?
Seems like paypal donation link has not been setup properly. It says 0$
> You have the choice not to consume any content or to consume free content.

Over the years that I've watched this discussion, I've come to notice that people who advocate for paying for stuff seem (though it might just be my perception) to use expressions like "consume content" more often than those who don't.

It's rather uninspiring, and I suspect it's counter-productive. No one wants to "consume content". They want to watch a film, or listen to a song, or read a book, or just be entertained. I doubt anyone ever invited a date round "to consume beverages and content".
Curious that the article didn't mention the 787, which is what Boeing bet on rather than an even bigger plane like the A380. Seems like that was a good move.
Even then, most of the ones I've seen are Chip+Signature and not Chip+PIN...
It reads like they keep wanting to back the product into their theories regardless of if there's a market for it or if their existing user base wanted those changes. My personal feeling was they discovered that the gamification angle was successful but the market wasn't huge so they got pressured into a change in direction to a (theoretically) larger market by their investors. All of these interviews and pontifications seem like justification for that move. It doesn't seem to have worked out well.
How do they check their processes pre-hiring? Like selection for interview?
"Air travel is set to more than double from today's 3.3 billion passengers a year to 7.3 billion by 2034, says the International Air Transport Association"

Even with more efficient planes, that's a lot of greenhouse gas emissions.
In an ideal world, the patent system and the legal system in general would be substantially simpler, and premium talent wouldn't be required. For really clear cut cases you wouldn't need an attorney at all.

Same thing with the mini-trial. In an ideal world the system would be a lot more efficient and cheaper for everybody.
I use 1password and run into this problem so frequently it makes me rage.
The original project that Duplicati was forked from, Duplicity, is very well known.

Other than GUI and Windows (VSS) support, I couldn't easily find how Duplicati diffentiated itself... might be nice to have a "Duplicati vs Duplicity" page?
Realistically, how important is FLOPS to most servers? File servers, web servers, database servers, authentication servers... none of them tend to be heavy on floating point.

Sure, HPC is all about FLOPS, and desktops tend to use quite a bit for presentation nowadays, but I would consider memory bandwidth, I/O bandwidth, thread scaling, and single-thread performance non-FP metrics such as branch latency to be much more important in the general server market.
I felt like if I installed Python 3 I'd still need Python 2 around. Didn't have a solid setup for supporting both and still being able to use virtualenvwrapper et al. I think I can just wrap some aliases like mkvirtualenv2.7 and mkvirtualenv3.3. Any better ideas are welcome.
TLDR Use 64-bit hashes, at least.
Attacking the Internet Using Broadcast Digital Television
I've been going to Agnostic Front shows since the late 80's, always a good time.
I don't see any reason (though I'd love to be enlightened) why the Rust implementation couldn't someday inline C functions. I'd actually be a little surprised if the underlying LLVM implementation can't use LTO to do it out of the box.
> to say a name is bad because it is hard to Google is dehumanizing.

Hu? You are aware that programming languages are not human right? So how does one "dehumanize" something that isn't human in the first place?

> the purpose of a name is not to maximize discoverability.

Actually, yes, it is. That is the number one goal of the name of a programing language or library. If I can not easily find out more about your product then you might as well not release it.

Are you confusing the names of humans with the names of programming languages? They serve different purposes.

And just to strengthen my point, actor names are required to be unique, if the name is a duplicate they make them change it. Yes, the actual human, is required to change their name. The actor guild understands what good names are.

Of course most people do not need to be searched for, but some do.

For example politicians with good names get more votes than those with bad names. (A good name for a politician is something easy to search, easy remember, easy to spell, and hard to make jokes about.) You might not like this fact about elections, but it is nonetheless true.

> do you feel the same about band names?

Depends. Do bands need to be searched for to get additional information about them?

> to defend my examples

Wait, so you are defending your example, by giving me more examples of bad names? How does that defend anything? You are just making my point for me.

Go search for some of those names, are see how the results are a mixture of different things instead of just the topic at hand.

I guess you have never come across some obscure language, and try to get more info about it, only to have most of your search results be about entirely irrelevant things?

Once you experience that you'll understand, that yes, it's a fact, not an opinion.
I'm extremely skeptical that this works a fraction as well as it claims. Almost all of the information it provides is astrology-like well-meaning doublespeak that applies to everyone at one point or another. There's even a name for it - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect.

That probably won't stop businesses from wasting truckloads of money on their own automated soothsayer, though.

Edit: Make sure you consult their physical terminal before emailing that big VC! http://imgur.com/UMIlcXz
I tried a list of unicode characters and their codepoint numbers, but it doesn't seem to recognize the unicode characters probably. Perhaps a normalization issue?
I, for one, have completely resigned myself to the idea that my employer, government and neighbors know all of the most shameful elements of my Internet usage. I haven't yet seen an approach to the privacy problem that delivers acceptably anonymous results for acceptably low effort, while simultaneously leaving my connection speed and latency relatively intact.

My experience with Tor was limited and was several years ago, but it felt like I'd returned to a 28k modem...except the entire Internet had begun to serve content on the implicit assumption that I at least had a few megabits of pipe. Do these routers actually offer a solid cornerstone of the kind of solution I've been waiting for?
i shivered with nostalgia thinking about time time i spent exploring and building friendships in azeroth. blizzard created an entire universe, and in some ways it is just as real as this one. very powerful and interesting to think about, thank you for sharing
How to save your own life when choking if nobody else is around
You can use telerik converter. It's free and it works pretty well. http://converter.telerik.com
https://github.com/web2project/web2project

I've been the lead for Web2project for the years since we forked from dotproject. In the simplest terms, we're a project management system but unlike something like Basecamp, we handle dependencies, logging time on tasks, accounting for projects costs and a ton of other things.

At present, we have a small community, but we have a few thousand installs ranging tiny two-person shops who have a ton of things going to at least one US Air Force Base.

The biggest challenge since our fork was dealing with the old code and continuing to support older versions without leaving people without a path forward. I put a ton of time into making sure the upgrade/update process works smoothly and no data is lost.
Folks making things like hardware Bitcoin wallets and such likely don't want an OS in the mix because of security considerations.
Thus perfectly illustrating Cunnigham's law.
I love XCode, used VS for many many years and wouldn't go back. I love IntelliJ also, but XCode is a close second
> Oh, wait, datasheet says its 0.0015mW max

I think you mean 1.5mW.
Absolutely - this wasn't meant to be a be-all-end-all to lead generation by geographical bounds. This was more of a "I had a cool idea, wanted to test it, and here's how I went about doing that" sort of post. There are a ton of things that don't get picked up by social signals, but it's a low enough hanging fruit that I figured it was worth looking into to see if it was even a viable source of data at scale.

I think a 'real' analysis of the data at a much larger scale (probably state-wide would be a good test) would yield some interesting data on the effectiveness of this implementation in specific.

As mentioned in the post - the circle packing implementation itself is general enough to be used in other applications. The point was to show off a cool potential application for a solution to a non-intuitive problem.
That's a security rule, not an anti-OS X rule.

I still bet that the majority of engineers at Google use OS X on their primary laptops (and they still wouldn't be allowed to put the code on their laptops, even if the laptops were Linux).
I recently made the code for my newsreader side project public: https://github.com/charlieegan3/serializer (hosted at http://www.serializer.io)

I don't know about pride but I'm pretty happy with it.
>shh example http server

>so http

Ha!
The question for me is whether you can retire the FE issue with a BE dispatch, and if so pull in another FE issue. So can you get the EU to the point where the all 5 of the BE units are subscribed and the three instructions in the front end have been pre-cracked waiting for a BE slot to free up?

So ...

Ins 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ...

FE: [ ] [ ] [Ins0]
BE: [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

FE: [ ] [ ] [Ins1]
BE: [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ins0]

FE: [ ] [Ins1] [Ins2]
BE: [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ins0]

FE: [Ins1] [Ins5] [Ins6]
BE: [ ] [Ins3] [Ins4] [Ins2] [Ins0]

FE: [Ins1] [Ins5] [Ins7]
BE: [Ins6] [Ins3] [Ins4] [Ins2] [Ins0]

And then maybe zero retires, that lets Ins1 proceed and it retires 1, 2, 3, 4, which lets 5 proceed, that lets 6 retire and then 7 proceeds.

But until I get a closer look at the TRM this is all speculation.
Not if what they look for results in younger people, but they don't stop old people capable of meeting the same requirements, as long as that requirement is not specifically age.

Some jobs likely have a lot more young applicants than old applicants - would those places be required to match the county, state, or national ratio of young to old in their workforce? (which of course is impossible for most locales).

If hiring practices don't match the overall ratios, that in itself is not illegal. Otherwise we could sue the NBA for both age and sex discrimination. However, if an old person or a woman could perform as well, they could get NBA spots. If they were as capable at everything as a younger/male athlete, and the reason they were not selected is because they are also old/female, then it's illegal.

Some jobs just have more capable candidates in various age/gender pools, so those hired reflects that reality.
A72 is nice, but to really compete in the server market I think they need another product. One that drops the performance/watt metric for the "as fast as it goes" metric. That is because while a lot of people are going to want efficient chips, if ARM really takes off there will definitely be people who want to share a binary with a CPU that is screaming fast.
We used to pirate GoT two seasons ago, then last season we paid for it "just for this season" since we wanted to watch it live. We never did wind up cancelling HBO even after GoT finished that season, we keep it for the movies, HBO Go (which is actually quite a good even with Netflix and Amazon Digital), and since then John Oliver has a show which we want to DVR.

I absolutely understand why people abroad are pirating and put that at the feet of HBO. Wire cutters now have an option with HBO Now if they wish, and those who don't wish to pay, fair enough, but HBO's product is actually surprisingly good.

Ideally HBO should have seen a large drop in piracy this season due to HBO Now, however unfortunately with this four episode leak people are so paranoid about spoilers that a lot of people feel "forced" to pirate it even if they legitimately pay for either HBO Go or HBO Now.

Keep in mind that a GoT season is 10 episodes. So a four episode leak is almost 1/2 of an entire season.
Looking at a few slides and reading comments on the Ars article, I think the error here is Ars' use of "i.e.". The part probably is 8 (micro-op) issue at execute, with 3 (fused macro-op) wide decode and 5 wide retire. So the "8-issue" claim could be accurate, but the way Ars presents it is just totally clueless.
Programming languages on Windows other than C and C++ typically link with kernel32.dll and so on, and not a C runtime. This gives a stable interface at a slightly higher level of abstraction than syscalls. Relying on libc is more a Unixism; without duplicating a bunch of the work in libc, you simply can't use many system services in ways the end user expects - network name resolution comes to mind (NSS), but other things, like threads, don't have portable standards at a lower level.
Ha, that's an interesting idea.

About 2 months ago -- for a presentation about being vigilant with your smartphone on public APs -- I implemented a toolkit that was essentially a man-in-the-middle/evil twin -- a single channel BSS analysis tool which allowed for broadcast and targeted deauth injection along with a probe request monitor, all in one interface, and a DNS spoofer in the other interface. I used HostAP for network spoofing. Its the simplest exploit but was very interesting building the demo and the kids enjoyed it!

This is another good little attack piece to shove in!
Sure, but explicitly saying "if you don't like it, have a retirement offer" seems a lot more pleasant than the implicit "if you don't like it, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out" that comes with basically any major corporate communication. Those are always your two choices when changes come down from on high. All this guy's doing is making option #2 explicit.
These are for learning and rapid prototyping. A raspberry pi hardly teaches anything about embedded systems compared to kits like this.
Not only is the coffee email example an animation, but it's tied to the scroll bar. This make no sense. I was wondering why the text was cut off before I realized what was going on. The images are starting to scroll off the top of the page before it shows me the entire text!