skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's a problem that has to be worked around in a system with a centralized control architecture, too. Presumably there will be some safety systems acting autonomously in the car (latency and network reliability being what they are) and those systems will be gamed.

To boil my position down: I want to see an Internet-style architecture rather than a "Bell System" style architecture. I'd rather have "smarter cars" with "dumber roads" and as little mandated centralized control as possible.

In a decentralized system attestation of identity (likely tied to one or more existing civil methods) and attribution of actions observed to individual vehicles would definitely have to be a component. Any identity system cannot approach 100% reliability, but if every car is able to report to law enforcement (or private driver reputation-tracking networks) the observations it makes of the behavior of other drivers I would expect that "cheaters" would be visible as statistical outliers.

"The car to my left doesn't answer as a known transponder challenge/response in the vehicle reputation database I am querying. I am going to assign a lower priority to any non-emergency events it is reporting to me."

"Hey-- that car just started broadcasting a different transponder response. Something is really, really funny where. I'm going to alert cars in my proximity that something is up so that they can physically identify the car with their LIDAR / imaging / etc. and treat it cautiously. If enough funny-business occurs eventually law enforcement will be alerted and physical interdiction can occur."

"According to the vehicle database I'm subscribed to this car always traverses statistically similar routes 15% more quickly than other cars. Other cars in its proximity on these routes have their traversal slowed as compared to their traversal of the same routes when this care is not present. It sounds like funny business is at-play. I'm going to cast a vote for this car to be more likely to be subject to an inspection."

etc.

I'd prefer such a world to not involve the ability for totalitarian (or-- ahem-- certain republics who purport to be democratic in nature and are filled with power-mad bureaucrats conducting dragnet surveillance) to use these tools for public surveillance, but I'm resigned to that fate. Self-driving cars themselves aren't a threat to freedom, but the infrastructures of surveillance and control that will grow up around them almost certainly will be.

Freedom aside, whatever happens is going to end up being an information security nightmare. Too many disciplines who have never had any exposure to information security are going to intersect with this technology, and each of those intersections is going to be ripe with all kinds of interesting threats and failure modes. People will be inconvenienced. People will be robbed, physically assaulted, and violated. People will die. I have no illusions that criminals are unsophisticated and that these systems won't be attacked in every possible way.
Precisely. Widespread knowledge would lead to tampering.

I was reading a recent insurance case where the driver staged and accident, but the black box indicated what really happened, and the driver withdrew the claim when presented with the evidence.

Widespread data logging including dash cams is going to improve driver behaviour. Even some cyclists are wearing 'dashcams' and this will no doubt improve treatment of all cyclists, even if overall penetration is low.
Given that you seem to be the only one in this thread who has read about this theory and takes it seriously, why don't you tell us how it explains these bright spots? Otherwise there's not much here to discuss. The Wikipedia article on "plasma cosmology" doesn't make it seem particularly relevant.
Well, that's certainly an unusual way of looking at it! Pointers are usually assumed to be "large enough" when you do this sort of analysis, with the data being assumed to fit into the available address space (if you're even thinking about such issues). But I see your thinking now!
>The spec has to be "perfect" for 3 to 4 years because there is no way to fix it.

This is absolutely not true.

There's the MR (Maintenance Release) for that. See for example JSF 2.1 and CDI 1.2. They were intermediate quick releases between major Java EE versions.

Even the platform spec itself can have a MR. Currently there's an MR for Java EE 7 in the works. See https://java.net/downloads/javaee-spec/JavaEE_7_Platform_MR_...

Because it's a spec, naturally more consideration has to go into it. Many implementations depend on it to be stable. In case of Spring there's only one Spring. Take it or leave it. Not having a spec behind you can be an advantage (change things whenever you want), but is a disadvantage as well (the implicit specification of how things work is in the code, but Java is not declarative and it's always a guess if specific behavior is just an implementation side-effect or an intended one).

Even changing things whenever you want can be a disadvantage. A spec naturally favors stability, which means I can run my old code with minimal or no changes at modern Java EE. Try that for regular open source libraries (be it from within the Java EE universe, Spring universe, or whatever). Chances are that the APIs and config files have changed 10 tens in the meantime.
Teespring (YC W13) Is Hiring a DevOps Lead
Working on the DevOps Team...

The DevOps team focuses on creating high quality automation and deployment systems with scalability and reliability at the core. We have multiple engineering sites: USA ­ SF, KY, RI, UK-London, India.

The DevOps team creates continuity between all locations and boosts the efficiency of our operations. We operate in an Agile methodology with continuous integration.

What is our team?

We need someone to take our DevOps organization worldwide this year. This means building a migration plan for moving from Heroku to AWS, redundancy for key systems, DB health optimization and scaling, a business continuity/disaster recovery plan, EU Data compliance, 5 minute code deploys/rollbacks, and add support for isolated engineering environments (Docker/Vagrant) to start.

What is the job?

The job is to lead others with the ability to get their hands dirty as an individual contributor. Operating in a technology environment with strong scripting (Ruby, Python, Bash), 100+ Linux Servers, Cloud Hosting (AWS), Configuration Management Tools (Chef, Puppet, OpsWorks), Postgres and MySQL, and ROR web app frameworks.

We want people with the ability to bring new ideas to help drive innovation. Our employee philosophy: IDEAS ­ Innovative, Deliver, Empower, Authentic, Scrappy.

What do we offer?

● Working with talented, collaborative, and entrepreneurial teams
● Medical, dental and vision insurance for you, your family, or pet
● Liberal paid time off and 9 paid holidays
● Generous stock options
● Free catered lunch and dinner daily
● Fully stocked kitchen with drinks, snacks, and bar
● Training, career development, and meet up hosting
● Commuter benefits
● Fun SOMA office with easy access to Muni, Bart, and Caltrain
● Apple computers and Thunderbolt monitors
● Social activities, office happy hours, live music, game room, and endless free t­shirts!

Please send your resume to ashley.hearn@teespring to learn more
Well, the correct solution means you never want to examine each ball more than once anyway. It's the kind of constraint you can consider as existing 'outside' of the algorithm.
That's a good question, and the answer might very well be 'nothing'. But we shouldn't be afraid to ask the question. Apple owes a duty to operate in the public interest, above and beyond its immediate obligation to its shareholders.
There's a scene in The Mote in God's Eye, just like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mote_in_God%27s_Eye
OK, but what in all of that explains shiny spots on Ceres, as asserted in your parent post?
Oh god, that's terrible. I had no idea that was a thing. How is that legal? I can imagine why a 24/7 tracker app would be a significant problem in such a case.
In which case, I don't understand what problem they're solving.

We already have Experimental.
Again noob question about syntax:

> impl<'a> ProductService<'a>

I understand why <'a> is here, but why repeated twice?
For really big corporations that own their own netblocks, the listed whois owner's email address should match the domain name entered, but that fails on domains that use Google for their mail. (Ie 'gmail.com' lists an @google.com contact which doesn't match the domain name.)

Just start with a blacklist for the big ones, and then manually opt-in domains after a look at a domain's webpage under pg's "do things that don't scale" mantra.
No, zookeeper doesn't do magic. It does, however, create a large enough value for P to be lost that it can be thought of as CAP; The number of failures required is high enough that, in normal use and sane configurations, you won't partition.
There's an off chance you could do an extra level of verification using the mail headers, but I wouldn't bet on it. Keep in mind that email is an old technology, it lacks a lot of things that would make it more efficient/useful in 2015
I've been happy with internet.bs for a few of my projects and some other domains for clients.
Serious question...what kind of developer can you be without knowing SQL?
I was also happy that some Police officers were wearing cams. 3rd eye is powerful.
That is the "x86 on RISC-ish core" interpretation of term microcode, which is probably not exactly correct as far as the actual implementations go.

As a technical term, microcode is contents of memory that is used to implement CPU sequencing (in contrast to doing sequencing in hardwired random logic or having essentially no sequencing logic as is the case in classical RISC designs). In most straightforward implementation it's essentially turing machine with microcode as state table and tape replaced by rest of the CPU. Various enhancements and modifications are possible which end in having essentially full-blown CPU for processing microcode, but even in that case one thing is critical for the term: the microcode only handles control functions (sequencing) and does not directly process data.
As someone once quipped: "A green light only means it's legal to cross."
When I read about MERA the Psychohistory instantly came into mind from Asimov's "Foundation".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory_%28fictional%29
Bayesian filtering. Add points for things that seem personal, set a threshold of points.

This is how, eg, anti spam often works.
He's pro-technology, pro-privacy, anti-DRM, anti-DMCA, etc. I'm hoping that he will use this role to make the government a little less technophobic, a little less inclined to use laws to prop up companies that can't cope with new technologies, and a little less inclined towards mass spying and data collection.

On the other hand, I have no idea how much influence this role actually has; we'll see how it goes over the next few years.
Here are some law startups:

www.hireanesquire.com
www.plainlegal.com
www.InCloudCounsel.com
www.casetext.com

There are quite a few law startups with legal practice SASS offerings, b2c marketplaces, document management. You likely haven't heard of these unless you're a lawyer, and even then it's not likely. How many dental startups are you following? None, I'm guessing.
" I should prioritize my own over the rest of the world"

It feels like you're suggesting that a job such as SpaceX is automatically beneficial to the rest of the world.

I suggest that you are assuming too much. Could SpaceX usher in a golden age of transport and colonisation? Sure. It might also fail.

I suggest that you are also assuming too much by suggesting that parenting your children is selfish and (implicitly) doesn't benefit the world. It's possibly that SpaceX takes us all to Mars and none of the kids/descendants of its employees were ever going to achieve world changing things without their mum/dad being around more. It's also possible that some of those kids would have achieved greatness if only they had a more present mum/dad in their life.

You can't bail the future down, it's made of unrealised possibilities that we make real with our choices. Those choices are either implicit or explicit and we have no way of knowing what will actually happen.
As you venture down into the realm of cheap consumer routers, you run out of ROM to hold the code implementing IPv6 long before you run out of RAM.
Here are some law startups:

www.hireanesquire.com
www.plainlegal.com
www.InCloudCounsel.com
www.casetext.com

There are quite a few law startups with legal practice SASS offerings, b2c marketplaces, document management.
> And I don't see any significant effort being made at making it an easy tool to learn and use.

Just to name a few off the top of my head:

1. Lots of focus on friendly compiler error messages, including typo correction, automatic lifetime suggestions, and error message explanations.

2. A strong worse-is-better approach in many aspects of the language design, such as preventing reference-counted cycles (we don't try to), numeric overflow (we don't try except in debug mode), typeclass decidability (it's deliberately undecidable in corner cases to avoid complex rules), prevention of deadlocks (we don't try), userland threads (we don't implement them anymore), asynchronous I/O (it's out of the domain of libstd for now), etc.

3. Blog posts like this one to introduce aspects of Rust, as well as the tutorial.

4. The Cargo package manager, as well as crates.io.

5. Naming conventions designed to fit well with C, for example choosing "enum" over "data"/"datatype" as in ML, "trait" over "class" as in Haskell (since the latter means something totally different), but modified in some cases to avoid leading programmers of C-like languages astray (for example, "interface" changing to "trait"). This naming process has taken time, but I think Rust is in a pretty good place now. There are obviously disagreements as to the naming, but we can't please everybody.

Certainly we weren't perfect, but there was a lot of effort put into making Rust as easy to use as possible.
I'm doing the course, as it's something I haven't learned in depth yet.

They mentioned pronunciation : 'S-Q-L' vs 'sequel'. I've always pronounced it S-Q-L. The lecturer implies there's no right answer, that 'sequel' is historical but 'S-Q-L' is preferred for international use.

The annoying thing, though, is that in writing a choice has to be made. If someone pronounces it 'S-Q-L' then to read 'a SQL query' is weird -- it should say 'an SQL query'. And vice versa for someone who pronounces it 'sequel'. 'an sequel query' isn't right.

So, in writing, what is correct? 'An sql query' or 'a sql query'?
Why are major app vendors going to deploy another federated identity system that virtually none of their users will use? OpenID was a fiasco. This seems even more complicated than OpenID; at least in OpenID, there were huge sites you already used that could serve as anchor identities.
bad link :(
Thought experiment: what happens next?

Press release from NASA: "Unfortunately, the Dawn probe appears to have experienced a technical malfunction, resulting in complete signal loss. Engineers are studying the problem, but no further information is currently available."

That's about all we'll hear, for a while at least.
I would recommend building a Twitter clone if its just for learning and fun.
This seems like a depth first search in a tree. The deeper you go (the more you learn) more and more ways open up to investigate.
You are thinking of http://sawstop.com/why-sawstop/the-technology. The problem with your comparison is that cars already have brakes. Driverless cars would improve reaction time, but can't do anything to affect stopping time. You would need to activate some additional braking system.

<snark>I also don't see how a car could dive below the roadway instantly. Roads don't have car-sized holes in them. Usually.</snark>
One who does lots of low-level C/Assembly programming. I know several people who do lots of low-level OS work, and don't use SQL.
Working for me as well, good stuff.
Startups practicing law (rather than providing law-related services other than legal practice) are difficult given restrictions on the practice of law, including legal ethics rules (e.g., things like ABA Model Rule 5.4(d) [0].)

Also, while in other industries if you break the rules of the industry the corporation pays a fine (which is part of the risk of a startup) and the principals all move on with their lives and livelihoods.

Lawyers who break the rules of their industry can be disbarred. While this doesn't completely stop all move-fast-and-break-things in the field, it does limit the willingness of people in the field to engage in it.

Another factor may be that purchasers of legal services tend to be looking to mitigate risk by purchasing those services, which may make them reluctant to consider novel and unproven models.

[0] http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibilit...
Ok, I might overstated it for dramatics, but what I'm complaining about is that being considerate should go both ways. I'll be happy for you that you have a kid and congratulate you, but please don't assume that it's in any way as important for me as it is for you.

It reminds me a thing my friend told me once, that she sometimes wonder whether if she'll have a kid, will she be as obnoxious about it on Facebook as many of her friends.
Why Asia's Richest Man Is Investing $10B in America
Programming I mean that I have 5 different ways of doing anything and everything. SO if I want to do loops (I never do and people shouldn't) I can. If I want to do strict funtional programming, no problem. If I want to use a SQL type syntax I can use data.table. This is frustrating at first since stackoverflow will have a bunch of solutions and it will be something new. I end up really using a few libraries and sticking with them. I use dplyr, stringr, httr, ggvis or ggplot2 and tidyr.

Graphics I can use just about anything. I can use plottly, ggplot2, D3.js, PDF report, HTML, send to a blogging site, interactive graphics with ggvisand Shiney, even PowerPoint slides.
the former are true countercultures. The latter are just subcultures. Often people use the two terms as if they were the same.
It's a crank theory. Don't waste your time.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Electric_Universe
I tried Windows 10 on both my desktop and tablet. I went back to Windows 8 on the tablet because the UI was horrible for tablet.

If anything, I think the pendulum swung back too much the other direction. There are a lot of UI decisions they made that make the experience with a tablet device painful. For example, the decision to get rid of the Charms Bar (in Tablet Mode) was a horrible one. A lot "Metro" apps don't really run full-screen anymore. Edge Browser isn't nearly as nice of an experience as full screen IE was (with the swipe gestures for page forward/back navigation).

On the desktop though, it has been quite nice to use...
Here's the thinking: People driving cars or shopping at convenience stores are a pretty wide slice of the population. On the other hand, most people aren't and never will be hitchhikers. Since most normal people opt out of the group, hitchhikers are thus more likely to be dangerous people.
Wouldn't

whois 'domain foo.com'

likely return an admin contact at foo.com even if they're using Google Apps?
Birth plans have moved on. They should consider the rare but catestrophic events -- the doctors can only save either the mother or the child. Which one do they save?

Most people don't like thinking about it, and most parents won't need it. But it is a good idea.
Functions are not first-class citizens in Python?
> political cloud

cloud-based politics? Not yet. It's still clout-based ;)
Some languages, like French, have a group which can dictate what is and isn't correct in the language (as it turns out, the vast majority of French speaking people don't give a rat's butt about what the Académie Française thinks and still do as they please, but that's another story).

In English, however, there is no such authority. Whether you are writing a SQL query or an SQL query is all up to you. Aren't you happy you don't have an old wrinkly white French dude to chastise you about which one is correct?
As a PHP developer, I was waiting for this feature for many years. I can't wait to use it in a real project.
NASA Funds Electricity-Harvesting Robotic Space Eel
Why would they go to Ceres and not Earth? From our perspective at least it's much more attractive.
I think the existing auto fleet can be overcome fairly easily, albeit by a company that enters the market in a position that's initially losing.

The model I see that will remove individually-owned, occupant driven vehicles will some variation of:

My company will purchase your auto and credit you some amount of haulage on my autocar network, and perhaps some cash. For the low income people using sub-$1,000 cars a token amount of credit will be sufficient. The real value for them will be the convenience and reliability of transport they get from my system. Imagine not losing your hard-won job because your "beater" car failed at an inopportune time. Imagine not having unexpected car expenses that make you choose between, say, food and transportation.

The higher-end market will be a tougher sell, but there are likely productivity, personal time, and environmental impact arguments that can be made there.

I'll sell your car (likely at a loss) in some area when I haven't achieved market penetration yet (or for salvage). Once you're bought-in to my network you might leave me for a competitor, but ideally I'll use regulation, contractual lock-in, and other tools to attempt to keep Customers tied to my product until I've recouped my initial investment.

I think it could work. I don't particularly like it, but I think it has at least a non-zero possibility of happening.
Google Plus News:Essential Bloggers Guide to the New Google Plus Collections
That (almost) happened to me. I was driving across West Germany in 1988, and picked up a hitchhiker. The next day I was in Frankfurt airport, about to fly back to the States, and I saw a wanted poster for him on the wall. (Wanted for murder.) So I found a cop, and pointed out the picture, and said "I picked up this guy yesterday about here, and dropped him off there." The cop said "We caught this guy two weeks ago."

So it was just somebody who looked like him. Still, it made me nervous for a couple minutes...
Here: "Passcard is a decentralized, blockchain-based identity system." -> This should be their tag line.
From: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/PPA
"Security

PPAs have not undergone the same process of validation as regular ubuntu packages. End users install PPAs at their own risk. Although each key is cryptographically signed, in order to confirm an uploader, keys are not matched to specific individuals, except via their "launchpad" accounts.

Subsequently, installing a PPA should be considered to be a low-security alternative as compared to the main repository, but marginally higher security than simply installing software at random from the internet. As part of adding a PPA, you trust the developer to not only install packages, but also to allow them to provide ongoing updates."

This pretty much sums it all. It's not matter of hostility towards PPA or trying to keep things oldskool. With all effort towards signed, verified packages, reproductible builds etc. adding functionality like PPA is for me nothing more as installing "shareware" windows apps from random sites.
Building packages by yourself is not that hard especially with fpm or checkinstall.