skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Being fast was good for the customer too. Being able to show up a few minutes before the plane was scheduled to depart, buy a ticket, walk out on the tarmac, board, and take off is a far cry from modern air travel.

The "bus" mentality, really worked in TX where the cities are close enough to have a lot of commerce/travel but far enough away that driving can take a considerable amount of time. Flight time between dallas->houston is an hour, driving is 3 hours. The problem is that with full planes, reliably buying a same day ticket is basically impossible. Add in parking/shuttles, security and and all the BS pushes the time in excess of 2 hours. Plus, its hard to guess at weather a few days out, so sometimes you know on the way to the airport that delays/etc are going to cause a flight to take longer than driving.

The 5 minute faster boarding time on SW is no longer a customer service advantage when the customer has been waiting over an hour to board.
Distributed load testing using Kubernetes
> because an orca will neither grow up to be able to give consent

Conjecture that I do not agree with. Orcas can definitely give consent, it depends on the situation.

> nor could they reach that capacity as a species (within human timeframes).

More conjecture with which I disagree. Orcas can talk and they can indicate consent already.

> there isn't any selection pressure guiding them in that direction.

Conjecture. Strongly disagree.

> Personally I think Sea World is criminally abusive because it is necessarily incapable of holding large water mammals like orcas in captivity in a way that minimizes suffering for them

Finally, something we agree on.
What about a P.O. Box and a TaskRabbit?
If we could only get people like that into cars.
Supreme Court decides not to review Oracle v. Google API copyright case
Relevant thing that was posted on HN last year: http://www.vassalengine.org/

I haven't had a chance to try it out but it looks great. Apparently it allows you to build board game mockups, and then play them locally or online. Useful for prototyping gameplay without having to print stuff, or alternatively you can also try games out before buying them.
FYI in my opinion there are only a few travel sites.

sure theres plenty of hotel or airfare or rental or 'town of xyz events calendar' sites but no one solving the entire problem.

I've yet to find an end to end trip planning site, especially one that is family oriented.
> "better targeted with useless ads."

That made me laugh.

> "SEO optimized junk"
This did too.

>"only get very targeted advertising from business big or small"

Wait, did I misunderstand your first points?

Seriously, is this post a joke or were you serious? I cannot tell.
Uber Executives Detained by Police in Paris
I agree I do have more time, I am also traveling at a higher speed because I am not taking as sharp of a turn, and because there are frequently stopped cars at that light while one is turning the bikes moving in the bike lane are often obstructed to the point of not being visible until they are in the process of running the red light while one is turning.

It is not my intent to say whether a "Right-Hook" or a "Left-Hook" presents a greater danger to the cyclist, merely that I find it greatly aggravating to hear someone use the avoidance of a cycling situation in which the driver would be at fault, to justify a situation where the cyclist would be at fault and still be in what I consider a dangerous situation.

Edit: To be honest I have many more issues with other drivers in MA than I do with cyclists, besides awareness of left turns needing to be more widespread among cyclists, I think they are doing as good a job as can be hoped for on the roads around here.
Yeah I was talking taxes purely.
Microsoft’s Visual Studio 2015 Will Launch on July 20
People have this strange idea that running a red light is strictly worse than breaking the speed limit.

It isn't. I ride a bicycle. I don't run red lights as a general principle, but if I'm at a quiet intersection which I can see to be clear, I don't think coming to a stop and then cautiously proceeding is a terrible thing to do. It's significantly safer than breaking the speed limit on city streets. I also think it's worth noting that many intersections are designed for cars. The safe way to proceed through those intersections is not necessarily to behave like a car.
Cyclists have a very different set of motivations when getting from A to B than cars do. Pedestrians also have a different set of motivations for their actions, but you notice it less because they generally have their own space. I don't think any sort of mutual understanding will help the situation much. The only ways to deal with this is to bring motivations in line or separate out the traffic into separate areas, which is how most cities end up dealing with the issue.
The primary issue between cyclists and motorists is that very generalization. How about "individuals in cars", and "individuals on bikes".

I always stop for red lights. It waaay too dangerous not too. Multiple times I've had pick up trucks hit their horn and blow by me traveling waaay over the speed limit, when I'm following all the rules.

Conversely, some cyclists zip in and out of traffic, hit people and scrape cars, and create unsafe situations around them. Pick up trucks routinely give me a few feet when they pass, and even yield at bike path crossings.

Just treat everyone respectfully and stop blaming every bike or car for that bad situation the other day. Everyone is different.
First, there is reading an uninitialized variable (i.e. something which does not necessarily have a memory location); that should always be a compile error. Period.

You're out of luck. You have to solve the halting problem to statically analyze whether or not a variable will be used when it's undefined. The reason why this is not solved well is because it's impossible to solve perfectly! Java made another approach that I hate:
For example if you have

Object a;
for(int i = 0; i < 1;++i) a = new Object();
a.toString();

then Java will give you

error: variable a might not have been initialized

even though it's plain and obvious that a is initialized. Things like that make me mad, it's a non-solution.
Isomorphic router in functional paradigm
I'm the author of this post and yes, this is exactly what we found. All I can do is speak from experience in selling a B2B app that is priced at $5 a month / user (I can see how this would be different for different pricing models), but what we found was that these were not the users that were talking about the app and spreading the word for us.

RE: collect credit card up front... This is one of the next tests we are going to set up in our on-boarding process. Right now we don't bill the cc (or ask for it) up front.
It's not clear that this means APIs are now copyrightable.

CAFC is not normally in the appeals path for copyright lawsuits, so it is not clear if district courts will take CAFC's decision as precedent. They should follow the Court of Appeals for their numbered circuit.

Oracle vs. Google only went to CAFC because it was also a patent case, and that dragged the copyright side of the case with it.

It certainly makes things more complicated, though. I suppose that is an inherent problem when you set up a system where there are two independent courts that are in the appeals path of the same trial courts, and neither of these appeals courts is in the appeals path of the other.

This could be fixed by changing it so that on a mixed case like this, the copyright aspects of the appeal go on to the Court of Appeal for the numbered circuit, and the patent aspects of the appeal go on to the CAFC.

Normally when a court hears something that it normally would not because that is part of a larger case, this is done to avoid duplication of effort. For instance, if I sue you over a California contract and a copyright which all arose out of a failed business deal, the case will be heard in Federal district court. The Federal court will hear the California contract case, and apply California contract law.

This makes sense because the contract case and the copyright case all arose out of the same business deal. The two cases are going to have largely the same witnesses, and the same issues of fact to be decided. It would be wasteful to conduct two different trials, in two different courts, to adjudicate this.

But appeals courts do not have witnesses, and are not trying to determine facts. All of that they get from the record from the trial court. Appeals courts are dealing with matters of law, not fact. I don't see how it would be much of a burden to argue the copyright matters of law in one court and the patent matters of law in another court.
> What makes it so impossible?

Southwest flies 737s, which hold around 100 people (says Wikipedia). I can't imagine getting 100 people off a plane and then another 100 back on, plus stowing/unstowing baggage, all in 10 minutes.

Maybe that's why Southwest offers free checked baggage, to reduce the time passengers spend handling carryons.
> [Paragrahph about bikers running red lights] In short — people are more likely to break a law if they see other people already doing so.

Actually there's only evidence to say one is more likely to break _that particular_ law.
For the particular case of understanding cache friendliness, though, I'm not so sure looking at the assembly can help that much

While the assembly won't tell you the cache behavior, it gives you the information to correctly reason about it. By contrast, the compiler is free to substitute (and frequently will substitute!) a different algorithm than you wrote. Or needlessly spill variables to registers, or decide that undefined behavior allows it to optimize out the lookup.

For example, if you write a loop within a loop that strides over data in a particular pattern, modern compilers feel free to reverse the direction your iterator progresses, or even invert the two loops to stride in the manner it thinks best. It will even detect common patterns, and substitute a completely different algorithm. Sometimes this means the actual instructions and timing for your test cases will be identical even though the cache behavior of your algorithm as intended should be different. In practice, this optimization often works in your favor, but under analysis, it will lead you down many false paths.

since caching manifests itself ony at run time. One has to learn about it in indirect ways via measuring.

Or even better, modern processors have hardware counters that allow these to be measured directly. For Linux 'perf', Intel's 'VTune', and 'likwid' are helpful for this. I don't know what the parallel tools are for Windows, but presume they must exist.

But the part I'm stressing is that even with exact measurement of the number of cache hits and misses, you should not (must not) assume that the code you wrote in C++ is representative of the assembly that is actually being executed. Compiling with -O0 can improve the alignment between source and assembly, but at the cost of making measurements useless by dramatically increasing function overhead and making excessive use of the stack.

I stand by the statement that if you want to benchmark the merits of an implementation (rather than just its incidental performance on a particular processor with a particular compiler with particular options), you should be looking at the assembly rather than the source code. It's not that looking at the source will always lead you astray, or that it gives you no insight, but that reasoning about the source will mislead you much more frequently than looking at the actual assembly being executed.
There is a common flaw in this line:

> If half of all banner ads are never seen, then that
> just means the cost is $10 CPM instead of $5 CPM.

It assumes that web sites are infinite, they are not. Delivering web pages, and processing clicks, costs CPU resources and bandwidth. A fraudster can put up a bogus web site and throw fraudulent clicks at it and steal fractions of a penny in the millions. And because it is all fake they have very low over head. But an actual web site that is putting up actual content is (hopefully) paying authors, doing research, paying license fees for images, etc.

So click fraud drives the price an advertiser is willing to pay downward since, as you point out they know what they are willing to spend to get their ads shown, and it drives the price below what a legitimate web site needs to continue operating.

Or in Facebook's case the cost of combating fraud overwhelms the price people are willing to pay for a click. Same problem.

Or Google for that matter, the fact that CPC rates have fallen over the last 5 years isn't really something they have been able to fix, and its cutting into both their operating margin and their user experience as they try to make up the revenue in "inventory".

> CPM will be fine forever. Intuitive people don't
> need direct measurements.

Come back and tell me that next year on the 1st of July. (seriously I just added a calendar item to check CPM rates in July 2016). Web advertising is either going to change or die. Since there is a lot of money involved I'm betting on change.
You're pointing out the obvious that i was implying in my post in the hope that it already was obvious.

Getting out of the saddle is both a slightly strenuous thing to do, and also moderately dangerous, since you have to balance on a vehicle that is devoid of inherent balance at low speeds. Dangerous since you run a small risk of "tipping" into the car that's half a meter left of you, sometimes less. As for the tipping comment, yes, that is valid, but also highly depends on the anatomy of the rider. At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection.

Many intersections have affordances like light poles, rails or just the curb that i can use, but sometimes stopping at an intersection for me means i have to entirely get off the thing.
I did a startup like this once... Unfortunately, I discovered that most people weren't motivated by money the way I assumed they were.
My view is naturally biased (since I live in the area), but Reno/Sparks might very well be a potential site for such a mini-manufacturing boomlet. We've already got Tesla's Gigafactory coming in (albeit on the outskirts), and it sits on some pretty major rail and road routes (including I-80, which hits quite a few cities across the U.S.). Plus, taxes are low, which is generally a plus for a business.
Unlocking Your “Therefore” with Data
This quote struck me "I'm pretty sure his response was that what tools
others chose to use or not use was not his concern"

On the one hand I feel a conflict of wanting to use every new, shiny tool. But a dose of this attitude would help me get a lot more work done.
"We point out that it is possible, purely from a technical perspective, for us to see your emails, address book and calendar data, if you have not encrypted them." It would be illegal for them to view your email because of German Law but from a technical standpoint it is possible. This other device is a pre-configured mail server at your home that stores all your mail. The two things are quite different. And this one I think if the software is opensource would be more secure.
I can get a much better sense of cross-traffic and other risks at an intersection when moving through it at full speed on a bike than I can when coming to a complete stop in a car, where 80% of my view is obstructed bymetal, and I can't hear anything.
I usually help close relatives and long-standing friends with computer problems. I felt funny charging them money, but a nice compromise I settled on after a while was asking for food as payment. They felt good about giving me something (many good people will actually feel guilty about getting something for free), I felt good about getting awesome food (often homemade), and it discouraged the worst leeching.
Lesser quality ingredients are also used. Additionally, Coca-cola is mostly water, which means its price will largely be driven by the price of water, which hopefully means that everyone will still be able to drink it.
The Simple Programmer Podcast
Javascript Jabber
I'll second this, before becoming a programmer I was a mechanical engineer in piping, we have tons of inefficiencies like this still. Partly it's that the people who run these industries are comfortable to keep using fax and e-mail, but another issue is that companies often don't have access to good technical knowledge to pick the right tool or develop better ones. Huge opportunity here.
I'd rather he was in a car. There was a red light camera on the crossing. That's incentive not to jump the light and a penalty if he did.

Unfortunately he was dishonest and arrogant and knew he was going to get away with it because identifying a cyclist is near impossible.
It'd benefit from simply dropping it. Why should all of us pay and deal with these stupid hacks, just because some astronomers can't fix their software?

Move to leap hours, and by the time it's needed, let the AIs sort it out.
> every time a cyclist stops, they lose kinetic energy and have to work harder upon starting off in order to accelerate and restore that kinetic energy.

Please. When you choose to ride a bicycle, expending energy is part of the bargain. And part of the point! Stopping means that you're getting more of that exercise that you're so smug about.
javascript jabber, I don't always listen so much to the language specifics but the ideas. I enjoy it.

There is also Ruby Rogues which is pretty good too.
gcc 4.9.2 gives: warning: 'bar' is used uninitialized in this function

Maybe you are using a old version.

If you enable -Wall which you always should then this flag is automatically enabled.

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#inde...
Big Data in the Automotive Test Industry

Ever log every single sensor output (as well as 200 more) every 50ms of a vechile over an 18 hour road test while recording audio and thermal video from 2 dozen different points? How about on fleet of 40 vehicles daily, for 2 months, in the middle of Alberta or Death Valley.

Have a good way of querying, analyzing, processing, and securing all this time series data in a way that can handle literally getting >100TB per hour? And can keep up with the expected geometric growth? (I've got a decent solution for this actually currently needs to be vetted). (Also security has to provided on a per-channel basis, not per-test, T1/T2 companies need access to their test data, but not global data).

Contact me. I'm a member of the ASAM standards committee that recently met to discuss how basically every auto-producer and tier 1 has NO CLUE how do implement this. And easily 2 dozen companies are just waiting to throw money at this problem.

Currently one doesn't exist, and the solutions that do exist manage paths to raw data blobs, not actual records/data points.
While I like MSVC team approach to this I don't think it's necessarily worse to just warn as long as that warning consistently work.
I mean, just add some warning options to your compiling script and you are good to go. I am getting this error from GCC very consistently and as good as compilation error in practice.
It does.

jamm@outlook.com

Thanks.
If someone is too lazy to bike, my suggestion is to embrace the laziness and get a car.

I guess I could suggest they walk or jog - but being reasonable - biking is a lot more practical than walking or jogging when you have a 6 mile commute.
I would suggest the whole thing can be avoided by the exchanges setting their own ticks. Any and all Bid/offers are queued during the tick and then applied, in order, during the next tick.

before I did some research I thought this would be a good "anti-HFT abuse" idea but I still think it has considerable merits.
That's us!

We started out doing exactly that... send an email with a human readable date to our service, and we'll send you that email back. We also support recurring reminders (every3days@followup.cc), sending attachments directly to evernote (evernote@followup.cc), dropbox, drive, and other things: http://help.followup.cc/knowledge_base/topics/cheat-sheet

We do a lot more now, but that's still our core functionality. We also have a widely adopted Chrome Extension that also makes this a point-and-click operation, but I personally go with the text based approach.
This kind of discussion occurs every time there's a news story of some biker getting hit by a car in /r/philadelphia. There are several real reasons for why bikers don't (have to) stop at red lights:

1.) Bikes are not registered. You can't "get my plate number". I can ride away without receiving any kind of retribution. Not as common in a car now that we have things like vehicle registration and licensing.

2.) Bikes, on average, move much slower than cars. Therefore, the damage that they could potentially cause to innocent bystanders is much less pronounced than if they were driving a car. Obviously this isn't a hard and fast rule, but in general bikers cause more damage to themselves than to others.

Personally, I stop at red lights unless it's pretty clear there's no one coming. I almost always wait a few seconds either very slow or stopped at a red light before proceeding if I can't see around the corner coming up. I'm not going that fast so stopping at a moments notice isn't going to throw me over the handlebars.
Sounds interesting. I'm not seeing who the customer would be? How would you charge for it? (Feel free to email me if you want to discuss offline in more detail)
US currency is mostly backed by oil.
The problem is, why would you build a startup for a business that can't afford to pay you for the value you create.

I have seen dozens of business start off this way and than eventually become enterprise only platforms or worse, programmatic advertising providers marking up CPMs by ridiculous ripoff margins.

(see: boost media, dispop, etc...)
But you don't need to replace the GC. HotSpot alone comes with a choice of 3 (or 4) GCs, and a fifth will join them. As of Java 9, HotSpot will support pluggable JITs (written in Java!). Quasar's bytecode manipulation is common practice among a large number of JVM tools, including one of the most popular Maven plugins, many of the most popular JVM profilers, and Spring. It isn't some exotic technique.

And don't forget -- the JVM is a spec with many implementations (including some for hard-realtime systems), although I'm talking of OpenJDK's HotSpot here.

I totally agree about preemption (and Akka, obviously). Blocking a thread (userspace or kernel) is the essential abstraction of imperative programming (or, more accurately, suspending a continuation) of that is the essence of imperative programming (even functional imperative programming, like Erlang and Clojure).

Anyway, I'll get in touch :)
I really like Freedomain Radio: http://fdrpodcasts.com
I'm sorry if I sounded condescending to you, but it's pretty clear that organizations with a strong engineering focus need a strong and clear vision of how components integrate - and the current state of docker actively discourages that. The ability to shove tools together willy-nilly, hacking around their incompatibilities, does not a solid platform create. Some of your biggest features, like the various networking modes, are complete misfeatures; The only reason you need bridge mode is bad network layout, the only reason for container is because you've screwed it up and you're using bridge mode.

Both the dockerfile reference and run reference are incredibly long and filled with references to strange interactions with other features. The fact that features don't interact in ways that can be simply reasoned about but instead clarification is required is a huge red flag in core infrastructure.

Docker has done wonderful things in terms of getting people to think about their services rather than their hosts. But each new feature reduces that advantage, as it allows people to take lazier approaches to integrate their systems, and those approaches flat-out don't work.