skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Google says their self-driving cars were not at fault in all 11 cases and perhaps technically they were not but I don't think you can discount the possibility that the self-driving cars may have behaved in an unexpected manner that may have contributed to the accidents. A machine might make choices that are logical but which throw off other drivers. Strict adherence to the rules could cause problems. For example, there are cases where changing lanes in an intersection, although illegal, could avoid an accident. If a machine controlled car insisted on following the rules an accident might be unavoidable or the action could force another driver in to an unavoidable accident.

I don't look forward to the day when I'm no longer allowed to drive my own car but it would be awesome if robot controlled cars coordinated among themselves to avoid traffic jams and to operate safely at much higher speeds. I could see cars of the future running normally at 200MPH+ were typical human drivers would find it difficult to operate safely. Hey and no more traffic tickets. One possible way to move in this direction would be to introduce robot only lanes.
PPAs are an antipattern.

One of Debian's (many) advantages vs. Ubuntu is that there isn't an ecosystem of poorly maintained but easily found packages around the core.

Lending Debian's reputation to such an ecosystem will not improve Debians' standing or user experience.
> I would think that such a system would result in mob violence, sometimes triggered by good information, but often triggered by hearsay and rumors.

We are already seeing this with the "reddit affect" where some poor soul gets targeted by "Hey this guy didn't tip me on a busy Friday night," and it all turns out to be bullshit. Even if it wasn't, thousands of angry netizens shouldn't be picking on lone individuals.

There's also an element of bikeshedding here as an average Joe can understand being stiffed and be unreasonably angry about it, but perhaps cannot understand the intricacies of sexual assault or financial fraud. This is why police, lawmakers, prosecutors, lawyers, and judges are all trained, educated, and regulated in some fashion. This stuff is much harder than it looks. Anyone who has ever lived in a HOA knows exactly what happens when average Joes are given the authority to enforce random things. Its death by a million paper cuts and everyone is miserable and hates each other in the end.

We tried the snitch society in communist regimes (and still have it in places like Cuba and N Korea) and its hellish.

>Anyone who received too many independent reports would be investigated – police included."

Except the police have a powerful union behind them. 100 reports against me will lead to my arrest or a beating or whatever. 100 against a cop will merit nothing, maybe a rubber-stamped investigation that always leads to 'innocent.'
love the initiative, I will be in touch shortly with some additions to the list from our side!
Great job! I really like how you added a reflection on the door of the Front-Load Washer
The IPv4 address table needs 3x as many routes as a non-fragmented address space like IPv6 would, so it's a much smaller difference than it sounds like.
Is it me or is this post disappearing off the front page rather quickly?
> [...] the mega-banks are so reliant on regulatory goodwill that the regulators don't need to rely on specific statutory powers to punish them. Everything is a negotiation, in which the only thing the banks really have to offer is money.
Creep shamed on Facebook was actually man taking selfie with Darth Vader
Given the information available on how people actually drive (besides that mentioned directly in this article), how would one distinguish the automated car behaving "strangely" from regular human driver weirdness?

I bet if you quiz twenty of your driving friends, you'll find more than three opinions on the right way to clear a four-way stop, for example.
I haven't thought about how this affects car insurance.

Who has the liability for collisions?
Manufacturer? Owner? Last mechanic who serviced it?
I've been noticing a bunch of random people hanging out on my street (a cul-de-sac) in Santa Barbara recently and found that one of my neighbors is renting their rooms on Airbnb. I'm totally fine with it, except that the street already has limited parking. More cars equals less street parking for my family which sucks when we have to carry our 3mo old daughter + groceries a long ways down the street.
> However that begs the question: by sheer numbers would that make insurance on a automatic car comparable to a manually driven one? If there are significantly less manual cars, there are less accidents to pay out.

But less to spread the cost over. Moreover, insurance rates aren't set at just enough to cover the average expected cost (which would result in, over any given time period, a 50% chance of the insurance company losing money) but enough above that that the insurance company is fairly certain that it will not lose money -- because of the law of large numbers, this will (for any given minimum probability of profitability) be closer to the expected cost when there are large numbers to spread the risk over, and farther (above) that expected cost when there are smaller numbers.

So, smaller numbers of manual cars will -- all other things being equal -- drive up the costs of insuring manual cars if they are a separate risk pool from automatic cars.
The majority are, given half a chance. Introduce alcohol and many imagine they've been handed that chance. Macho shit permeates technology-related startups, from the language used throughout, to the expectations, preening and nostalgic whining about doing good and creating beautiful applications. The points raised by the author are clear and valid, and no bleating about how difficult it is to be a man will change that. Oh, and the fix isn't to tell women to man-up...
So in Rust traits can include full methods bodies, not only signatures?
EQ itself adds distortion. You may end up with flat characteristic, but poor sound quality.

Amplifier designers are avoiding capacitors in signal path to minimize harmonic distortion. Now imagine you would put such a beast as EQ in the path...
"autoautomobile" ;)
Currently in the US for those under 45, unintentional injury is the leading cause of death. As medicine increases, that age will just creep up.

Cars and drug abuse are the two leading causes of unintentional injury deaths, and the per-capita mortality for those doesn't seem to taper-off much with age so long as you are still capable of driving, so if we do hit the "immortality" scenario, then driving a car will be seen as a much more risky proposition than it is now.
News by Numbers: It’s the Journey That Matters
The End of the Open Road: How Hitchhiking Died
I think one of the problems is that when a self-driving car do cause an accident ,it will probably do so in an obviously incompetent way. Like running into a tree that was not mapped correctly, in a way a human would never do.

The cars may not be wrong often, but I think we would have a hard time accepting accidents that we cannot understand why they happened.
It's already common for automobile manufacturers to explicitly market the collision safety features of their cars. Many car commercials have collision test footage.
Yes: http://rustbyexample.com/trait.html
> Traits are somewhat between an interface and a mixin: an interface is made only of method signatures, while a trait includes also the full method definitions, on the other side mixins include method definitions, but they can also carry state through attributes while traits usually don't.

Rust's traits may specify just a method signature and force the implementor of the trait to implement the method, but they may specify full definitions of methods too.
Whether the block size is 1MB or 10MB in May of 2015 is "small stakes"... in May of 2018 (or whatever) the stakes might be larger.

Also, there's alternative approaches (payment channels, lightning networks, etc) for handling smaller transactions that may prove viable in the near future.

(To repeat: I'm not saying I'm against larger blocks, only that there's still smart people defending both sides of the argument at the moment, and that's why a stalemate has formed.)
I imagine this going one of two ways: either human-operated vehicles might be outlawed, or auto companies will apply market pressure to favor people not manually driving (steep, steep discounts in insurance for self-driving vehicles, since many states still require insurance but if the self-driving cars reach the safety goals they're aiming at, it's basically free money for insurers to insure them at any price).
Why girl to perform naked to pass art class, Parents Used Pot as Bargaining
The Python 2 codebase is growing much faster than Python 3, because the Python core developers have lost touch with the fact that its most dedicated users are not web people, but scientific computing users for who the overwhelming choice is 2.7. Anaconda gives you a 3.x choice on its website almost as an afterthought. Theano is half hearted on 3. Bloomberg doesn't even have a 3 access library (goodbye 3.0 for the entire finance sector). Asyncio, one of the so called killer features of 3, looks great but is 10 years too late and is done much better in other languages (goroutines). Python is seriously losing momentum: hey, even Hacker News quickly demoted this story to page 2 precisely because it attracted the usual flood of 2v3 comments causing the comment number to dwarf the score. It's become a controversial and uncool language thanks to this forced 3 story, and the fact that 6 years later in this dog-years world, this issue is still on the table, makes 3 an utter failure.

I predict that 2.7.9.x.y.z will continue well past 2020 and backport any truly useful stuff from 3 because that's much easier than porting 2 code to 3. Or, and the core developers should seriously think about this, they should build 2->3 right into the interpreter so you can run, unmodified 2.7 code on a 3 interpreter (2.7 libraries included), and then pick and choose the 3 features you want yourself.
congrats on the launch, linking figure/element numbers to is a feature i've had on my list of features of things i'll never build for awhile. also, have recently added thumbnail search results (think google patents had this ages ago, but has since retired it if they did) and a smarter weighting of keyword search (e.g., filtering out noise from sections and boosting hits in claims/abstract/etc). would love to help out if needed (contact info in profile)
Just like horse-riding, it will probably never be relegated below the position of virtually every other hobby in the world.
> They haven't made any greater strides in addressing thumb ergonomics on larger screens. Sure at least the buttons are at the bottom again but to make it truly next generational they should have utilized more gestures.

Imo gesture based UIs are UIs that are hard to use for average users.
It won't be outlawed; it'll just be priced out of existence. When autos are good enough, insurance costs for manual driving will skyrocket. Only the very richest will be able to afford driving on roads.
Yes. The feature has been proposed for Java too: "defender methods".

Originally I resisted them on the grounds of not being necessary, but they're used all over now. Being able to supply a default implementation is extremely useful.
You are already too late...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk
If the safety records meet goals, it's functionally free money for the insurance company regardless of insurance price. So one could predict a race to the bottom for insuring these machines.
I think the heat alone would disrupt a river ecosystem.
Do you have any projects outside of school? or work experience? if answer is no then yes, you should be worried.
I think there are a few things causing this:

1. Early stage funding is much easier to acquire than it used to be. This means there are more companies looking for A rounds after a seed stage than there ever have been. At this point, everyone thinks they're a big shot and very few people actually are, so their feelings get hurt when there's lukewarm VC interest in an A round.

2. The smart money has moved from B rounds to C rounds because there's too much noise in the early rounds. By C rounds you know more about the company's chances of success because you need meaningful revenue and a viable business model to raise C round money, but investing in a B round you often don't know an awful lot more than you did about the long-term viability of a company than you did at seed stage.

3. Companies are failing faster as a result of 1 and 2, which reinforces the perception that the smart money is moving out of B rounds.

I don't think that having more companies fail at A or B rounds is a bad thing; but the VC market is increasingly focused on the unicorns that will have a $10B IPO in 10 years. There are only so many of those that the economy at large can support. And I don't think that there will be a "Like YC, but for A rounds" because the sums of money we're talking are several orders of magnitude bigger. Seed companies need training in how the business world works, how not to get taken advantage of, how to build a model that scales, developing a plan, etc. The money is somewhat secondary in a seed round. Companies raising an A round might need a little bit of guidance and support in fine-tuning their plan, but mostly they need money to hire people and execute on their plan. If you're raising a B round, you just need money. YC solved the problem for seed rounds by just hiring people who know these things and sharing them among a bunch of companies.

And I wouldn't say that YC has single-handedly solved the early stage funding problem. They simply don't have that scale -- nobody does. They have somewhat indirectly solved it by showing the world a model for operating a sustainable startup accelerator that others have copied; and they are hugely influential, but I don't think any one organization can solve a problem like this. It's too much.
Figured as much. I've worked on projects before that have tried to make it work financially, but 3D capture always falls short on quality (and I'll bet the specular highlights on those appliances caused you guys many hours of fun if you tried that approach too!) and it's too expensive to hand-craft all the assets. Hope you guys make it work! It's a cool area and I'm sure you'll have clients queuing up if you can!
So you don't actually have narrow streets where you live. That's not really a counter-perspective to someone who's actually lived with them.

Are narrow streets really toddler friendly in practice? Cars are less frequent and slower, but when they do come through the spacing is much much tighter and more dangerous. You are basically sharing a sidewalk with a car. If you're lucky there's a few stubby bollards separating you from traffic -- which are meaningless to a toddler. If you have a squirmy/dashy toddler I would be very concerned about them breaking loose and dashing into traffic.
Apple could buy Greece, become a government and exempt itself from income taxes for the next 10,000 years!

(And replace apple symbol with olive too)

>> ...and the American companies will keep accumulating cash they don't know how to spend.

Not too many US companies are having this problem though.
New brave world, 2015
I've always thought a job at CloudFlare would be awesome, so much so that I took their list of requirements for a SRE role and set them as goals to work towards. After reading this list of questions, however, maybe I should lower my expectations, I could barely answer 25%.
C++ is Turing-complete, so you can do whatever you want. What Rust offers is an hierarchy free (i.e., no inheritance) polymorphism mechanism as a core part of the language.
Does anyone seriously believe Greece would ever pay them back?
> We want to deliver an experience that flexes elegantly across a continuum of devices

And there's the punch to the gut. Just like with Windows 8, if you want to use Windows 10 on the desktop your experience is going to be degraded by sacrifices made for mobile. I was really hoping that Microsoft would learn their lesson, since DirectX 12 is going to be exclusive to Windows 10 and I'm going to have to upgrade.

They're killing Windows on the desktop (where they have 91% market share) for the sake of Windows on mobile/tablet (where they have 2% market share). Again and again I think how much more attractive Microsoft would be if they decoupled their titanically-successful cloud/enterprise world from their depressing, clueless consumer arm. Microsoft shareholders shouldn't be paying for Nokia, the red ring of death, or the Windows Store.
I vaguely remember seeing it many months ago, but my memory has been known to lie to me. This may very well be the original source, thanks!
The usage share there referred to stats from Mozilla and Firefox 36, where HTTP/1.0 is seen in 1% of all HTTP responses compared to 10% for HTTP/2. / Daniel - author of those slides
The priority will be probably be not to hit the car in front of you so that you're not at fault for an accident.
Sony's been on my "do not buy" list since the rootkit debacle. They're missing out on sales of video games, cameras, and other consumer electronics (not to mention music and movies) for their misbehavior. And I know I'm not the only one who remembers.
The idea is not as ridiculous as it may seem at first glance. Apple, Google, Microsoft and a few other tech companies are together sitting on far more cash than Greece owes to its creditors.

The author proposes these companies bail out Greece in exchange for permanent low taxes on non-US operations.
Dart in Progress of Switching TLS Support from Mozilla NSS to Boring SSL
> Like if the self-driving car gets in an accident (that is a result of the self-driving car), who is responsible? Google? Me? Other driver? Car maker? Car seller? Insurance company?

The insurance company is not going to be responsible in the first instance, though it may be insuring someone who is responsible.

For the rest, its hardly as if the responsibility for damages that aren't attributable to improper operation but are instead result from the design/manufacture of the vehicle and/or the failure of the owner to properly maintain the vehicle in a safely operable condition have not been extensively litigated already; so, while "self-driving cars" might be a new thing, the legal system isn't devoid of guidance on how liability could apply to them.

> Humans have kind of accepted that humans make mistakes

Self-driving car errors are all human mistakes, even if the mistake becomes visible distantly (potentially in both time and space) from the error itself.
And you think it's perfectly ok for a company to say, "hey sorry guys we wont be delivering what we promised you because we made bad decisions and spent all your money." Sure companies fail but this is ridiculous. A typical example of a heavily promoted company riding a wave of hype in to the gutter. I'm sure it's hard for the guys who built this company but they should be ashamed of not delivering what they promised 300 of their customers. I found their post rather cavalier and deserving of some kicking.

I'm not saying HN should be a place of ruthless criticism and shnarky comments but I'm also not in the camp that thinks it should all be cuddling and cooing either.
Oddly enough the name is apparently due to Dave Ditzel, who was financing MCST at the beginning. The same Ditzel that went on to found Transmeta 3 years later.

PS. I didn't know that actually, just followed few links from the Elbrus Wikipedia page and bumped into an interview with the MCST founder from 2003 [1] - he basically says there that in the early 90s there was a spike of interest in the tech behind Elbrus 3. First it was HP, then it was Ditzel, who was at that time with Sun. Ditzel eventually quit Sun and went on to found Transmeta and develop the Crusoe. Babayan then goes on to say that "We are effectively on a market, except we are not seeing any money. But on the other hand without Ditzel we would've not gotten any (research) money and all our work would've died." Interesting stuff.

[1] http://offline.homepc.ru/2003/81/24693/
> JBoss releases updates to its implementation rather frequently. If you look at their release dates it's almost every other month. See ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/jbeap/

http://jbossas.jboss.org/downloads

EAP 6.4: 8 months
EAP 6.3: 8 months
EAP 6.2: 7 months

> Do you dare to state that Spring has no bugs or that none of their bugs is open for more than a day, week, month?

In about 50% of the times I have reported bugs or submitted pull requests against Spring they were closed within 6 hours. Spring releases about a month apart. The other 50% lay dormant for years. Still way better than any contribution I tried to make so far to Java EE. 0% success in about 6 tries.

> Java EE has a spec cycle of about 2 to 3 years (there was an article about this recently, Google it if you want).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Platform,_Enterprise_Edit...

Java EE 8: at least 3 years
Java EE 7: 4 years
Java EE 6: 3 years
Java EE 5: 3 years
Did you read TFA? The suggestion is to pay off part of the Greek debt in exchange for a sweetheart tax-deal with Greece, not to assume ownership of the Greek debt.
I never understood some of these high level appointments when its comes to technology. What does this role really do? It seems borderline ceremonial, like the King's wizard or somesuch.
Thought more people would find it interesting. See comment #13 in the linked issue.
Probably for the same reason that they call their unions "enums" or their heap blocks "boxes". Standardization of jargon has never been a thing with rust, just roll with it.
Microcode is a special unit in the decoder. When a microcoded instruction is detected in the codestream, it is stopped and replaced by a stream of instructions from the microcode ROM.

Imaginary example:

mul 37 -1

Could be automatically identified and replaced with a predetermined codestream of:

add (not 37) 1

This allows super complicated instructions (of which x86 has many) to be implemented with simple instructions, and it also allows the designer to work around bugs that might be discovered later on.
The turing-complete argument makes no sense here.
Even uncontacted Amazon tribe harbors bacteria resistant to antibiotics
Well apparently all of the rendering.

No part of your car would need gasoline if it were designed in a way not to need gasoline. But it does.
> There's also overhead in the sense of complexity for the programmer

Well, from the programmers' perspectives there are both read-time and write-time overheads. In C++-land, the discussion about the new (to C++) 'auto' keyword is about the trade-offs between the two.
Criminal proceedings against an entire company don't result in people going to jail, right?

While it seems pretty rare for this to happen, the officers of a corporation can be held criminally liable for the actions of the corp.
Not to mention that with the self-driving cars working as a functional panopticon, doing this and getting away with it for lengths of time is unlikely.

Even ignoring the privacy-scary scenarios of the car auto-emailing the cops to say "Dear local PD, this guy just jaywalked and halted traffic on Oak Ln, here's my [sensor gestalt] to prove it and a [photo of the offender]", it'd be pretty trivial for anyone owning a fleet of these machines who was tired of jaywalkers slowing down their commute to dump data on jaywalk-stops in the aggregate, giving cops all the numbers they need to target enforcement.
Unless that product cannot be produced for much less than the price those customers are willing to pay for it.