skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Overengineering by a factor of 5 seems decently conservative.

If you add triple-redundancy to all the mechanical elements you build a rocket that probably can't fly - which is certainly very safe, but maybe not so very useful.

I'd guess the problem has more to do with insufficient testing than insufficient design. It's likely the initial batch was easily up to spec, then there was little or no testing of further batches.

Easy mistake, IMO. If you think about the number of critical components, re-testing everything before every flight would be a huge and very expensive job.

I wonder if SpaceX are going to do less business with the strut supplier in future.
Declarative data fetching in React components with Baobab
Breakthrough Initiatives Introduced by Seth MacFarlane
I was thinking the same thing as I read the post. This would be huge in Nigeria and other African countries. I'm rooting for this to be a success.
> In the spirit of assuming the power cord and/or laptop battery is plugged in

Yes

> you are running 64-bit Windows v8.1, correct?

Yes

> you can run the following command to verify the above and see if Windows Update already auto-installed this KB (if so, it will be listed)

I did, and it is not.
I bought a dyson. To test it, I vacuumed with my old unit, and then immediately vacuumed with my dyson. surprise, I managed to completely fill the canister.

they're noisy and expensive, but they work really well.
I taught my nephew (8 year old) about making games and he is doing really well. I suggest Scratch[0] as well. I also enrolled him in the edx Scratch course and so far he is doing great solving assignments and quizzes. Usually he gets stuck when he is not able to understand the question (English is third language to us) and he skips those and continues the course. And every alternate days I sit with him for 2-3 hours and explain him the questions. I also got a PDF of the book Super Scratch Programming Adventure [2] (dead tree version isn't available in my country) and he loves it so far. He has made many games, as part of course and also on his own. He is proud of his accomplishments and I think thats great.

[0] - https://scratch.mit.edu

[1] - https://www.edx.org/course/programming-scratch-harveymuddx-c...

[2] - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1593275315
Shouldn't the credibility of "Rolling Stone" be called into question?
Yes please he is one of the best writers on the web in my estimation. Plus, he runs pinboard. I backed it, you should too!
The [ dictatorship => democracy ] imagery is helpful and was part of how we envisioned nilenso as it formed. On a long enough timescale, it also seems to make sense since those forms of governance have worked well for, well, governments -- why not businesses?

I have a read a lot of legal paperwork around co-operative corporate structures available in Canada (where I'm from) which permit external investment or distribution of shares in a variety of configurations. However, I'm not familiar with a single co-operative that actually operates this way.

Having additional motivation for avoiding VC has been helpful at nilenso because it often feels like the streets might as well be lined with suits trying to throw money at us. We have considered taking VC funding if necessary, but probably only the expansion of a business which isn't purely software: hardware, logistics, manufacturing and distribution of physical assets... we've repeatedly acknowledged that doing any of these might require more capital than we can commit by bootstrapping.
How to do big refactors without loosing your sanity
Out of curiosity, have you read the actual proposal?
Problem with AirBnb for business is the uncertainty: booking & checking. If you were able to have a confirmed booking and there were iPhone locks it would solve a lot of issues. AirBnb could underwrite the purchase of digital locks.
That's a pretty thought
Business lessons from the life of a high-priced escort (2014)
It seems they used to have more employees and 2 other co-founders. Wonder what happened
Your suggestion reads as though you read your own version of my comment to then be condescending to.
Devrajtayade
Those names are not very good. return takes a value and "monadifies" it. If you have function that takes a normal argument and emits a monadified value (e.g. int -> monad string). Then bind can transform your function so that it takes a monadified argument (e.g. monad int -> monad string) instead.

return and bind satisfy three laws:

1. If you have function that takes a normal argument and emits a monadified value. You could apply it to some argument right. Or you could monadify the argument with return, and then use bind on the function so it will accept the monadified argument. These two ways of using the function give the same result.

2. Remember how return takes an argument, and emits a monadified value? That means we can bind it! The second law states that the resulting function is just the identity for monadified stuff.

3. Lets say you have two functions f (e.g. float -> monad string) and g (e.g. string -> monad int) from normal argument to monadified value. We could bind them both and then compose them.

g_ = bind(g)
f_ = bind(f)
g_f_(x) = g_(f_(x))

Or we could imagine instead binding only the second function, then composing the functions, and then monadifying the composition.

g_ = bind(g)
g_f(x) = g_(f(x))
g_f_ = bind(g_f)

Law 3 states that these two procedures yield the same g_f_
How did you find this url? I would like to get the community edition ISO url, but can only find the RC dated 4/27/2015, when searching download.microsoft.com.
Publishers: Give in to Facebook (for now)
Was that difficult, being an emergency service?
It's not just HTML. I think any proprietary standard runs the risk.

We've been burned at my work by old word and word perfect documents from early 90's refusing to render properly in new versions of office. I think they tried about three recent versions of office before they gave up and resorted to scanning in hard copies as PDF's to recover some documents.

Access databases are also notorious for this problem. A lot of business apps were written with Access in the mid 90's and it has now become too expensive/time consuming to migrate them off of a dead technology. In business world stuff tends to run far longer than softawre developers consider. Hell COBOL and PL/1 stuff runs in some places still.
Apart from the privacy issues, one thing I really despise in Facebook is search. It literally sucks! Unlike Gmail, Facebook is built as a platform where information goes to die a quick death. In groups, as on web forums, a big drag is people asking the same questions again and again. Searching for information even by admins who would like to help people out is cumbersome and difficult due to the way Facebook search works (or doesn't work).

I really long for email discussion threads tied into a web interface with a great search engine behind (like on the * Group platforms from the early web).
I can't imagine being able to fall asleep if I just landed on the moon -- especially for those first two men!
Why was this voted down? Is this inaccurate?

Another layman question, what does this do to your credit score?
Books for Founders
The fraud aspect doomed Coin (and probably the similar competitors) from the start, IMO. It either wouldn't catch on (in part due to fraud or fear of fraud). If it did take off initially, we'd enter a carders' utopia where fraud would be easy because merchants would swipe any magstriped gadget without blinking, which would kill Coin when the card networks clamped down. And regardless, it basically only works in the US, where the clock is ticking towards the death of magstripes -- though I guess if they sell tens of thousands of magstripe Coins before that happens, they don't care.

It may be useful for loyalty cards, but even that has similar problems with the cashier being confused/skeptical, or just the hassle of talking about it when you just want to finish your transaction and leave. Apple Pay has apparently opened the way for loyalty cards over NFC[1], so hopefully that will keep spreading both in merchant numbers and availability on other mobile platforms.

[1] http://9to5mac.com/2015/06/10/verifone-apple-pay-loyalty-car...
Not quite; while the net downward force on your body is indeed less underwater, the pressure on all sides is greater. In particular, if you are at rest, the force pressing on your underside is equal to your weight plus the weight of the column of water pressing down upon you. (This force is indeed what keeps you afloat!)

The experience reported by these astronauts is that of the pressure underneath them being less. I can think of no way to simulate this on earth, save napping in near-freefall (e.g. while parachuting, or while on the Vomit Comet). This does not strike me as a sound idea.
Can't read English? Brainwashed nationalist with rich corrupt parents who was sent to the US to get an education because you couldn't compete domestically, I guess.
Nearly every website that has flash outside of youtube and vimeo
Weyl, not Wyle.
Learn to code like it’s the ’90s with Berkshire Hathaway’s normcore website
Feedly's Android app is a mess. I can fiddle with the settings to get it into a usable state, but the default behavior just makes no sense (and it's not good after the tweaking).

The default, so far as I can tell, is to dump every feed together to provide an "all-up" view. That could be okay, but then they layer a terrible card UI on top of it that's completely unintuitive. The top cards are big and generally pixelated (because it zooms in for some inexplicable reason), and it switches to a slightly different view after the first card, again, for no clear reason. I can swipe through the cards and reach the end, where it shows a giant checkmark and the words "Done" and "N reviewed". Reaching that page doesn't actually mean I'm done, though. Nothing is actually marked read until I go back to the top and tap on each them (or use the "mark all read" option). I'm either completely missing the interaction paradigm they intend or they haven't put much thought into what the interaction paradigm actually is. Maybe the devs all use iPhones and the Android client is an afterthought?

Meanwhile their website is generally okay, but I am completely at a loss for how to mark an item as unread once I've opened it. I should probably look for a different feed aggregator.
I like this idea. But I agree, it's a problem and this is probably one reason for experimenting with this. It sounds like the number of apps are already crazy, so not sure how YC will be able to sort through them all with more than a crap shoot probability of success.

According the PG, the big ideas are not obvious at first, so how can you make good decisions on so many ideas in so little time? Probably YC is going to filter the apps through 1-2K YC founders or something and then have a score sheet, silos of expertise, etc. Basically selection by committee.

Though I like the concept, I am skeptical of the judging, as well as the sheer number of apps coming in worldwide - too much white noise which hurts the ability of the many US based startups trying to get a seat at the table.
Steve Jobs grew up in Los Altos, with two parents who went to court to adopt him, and received their adopted son only after promising that he would attend university.

That's a lot more stability and safety net than most people have.
Perhaps if they allowed it to grow organically rather than trying to shove it down everyone's throats, it may be a different story.
The world wants to belive that YC works like Shark Tank.
How does this affect your credit score?
Ice Bucket Dollars at Work
Parsing continued-multiline data in Python
What are the things should be considered before hiring a CakePHP development?
If You Fly, We Can't [pdf]
NAB Bank Notification Phishing Email – Mailshark
Can you share the markdown sample? I've never used markdown before, outside of reddit (I think), and I'd like to use this sample as a reference.
> An appeal to authority is never a valid argument, as it is a logical fallacy (i.e. by definition invalid).

Jenny McCarthy and Dave Grohl's opinions on the effectiveness of vaccination are clearly as valid as my doctor's. Weighting my doctor's views above those is clearly a fallacy because debating rules.
Actually most large businesses are using someone else's money - the shareholders. The same sort of agency problems that exist in centrally planned economies also exist in large public companies.
The little bit about people believing the "AIs will take over the world" non-sense is gold.

I am still shocked that Elon Musk seriously believes in the pseudosciency "well Google has gotten better so obviously we will build a self-learning self-replicating AI that will also control our nukes and also be connected in a way and have the capabilities to actually really kill all humans."

Meanwhile researchers can't get an AI to tell the difference between birds and houses.

EDIT: I looked a bit more into the research that these people are funding. A huge amount of it does seem very silly, but there is an angle that is valid: dealing with things like HFT algorithms or routing algorithms causing chaos in finance or logistics.
If you work for startups taking time off is not hard at all! Startups fail all the time and it is an ideal time to take 6 months off. There is a bit of a stigma to taking too much time off between jobs, but if you can show that you actually built something during that time, it isn't hard to overcome. I even took off 8 months after I quit a job to write free software. I simply showed prospective companies the code I wrote during that time.

The main thing is to save money while you are working! It gives you freedom.
It is rather slow, due to limited bandwidth (Hymalayas) and lots of customers, but it is good-enough for web, git and ssh.)
Wikipedia suggests ~100 mpg/passenger [1]. As Schlappig has flown more than 400,000 miles, he's burned up about 4,000 gallons of fuel. That's a lot of fuel. It's enough to heat a northeastern United States home for about eight winters [2].

But it's not that much fuel. A 30-mpg automobile will consume a similar quantity of fuel (gasoline, not jet fuel) in 120,000 miles of driving.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport...
[2] http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/tables/pdf/wf-table.pdf
I'm pretty sure that software can tell the difference between birds and houses now.
Ok, rephrase that as "at least I'm only losing 80% of my salary instead of 100%".

Plenty of people who could create great things are also saddled with families and expenses that run to 80+% of their disposable incomes. It's all well and good to suggest that an individual can live on ramen noodles, but a family and young children cannot and should not have to. That leaves only a few options left for such people to start a company: do it on the side in evenings/weekends; and save up a nest egg then quit/reduce your job to work on the startup.

Suggesting that willingness to forgo having a family is a pre-requisite for entrepreneurship is fallacious.
> you are appealing to authority, which is not a valid argument

Outside of high school debate clubs, it's pretty reasonable to consider the demonstrated expertise of people making claims. I tend to take the opinion of medical researchers about the relationship of HIV and AIDS over the opinions of members of the Foo Fighters and Thabo Mbeki, for example.

The opinion of an expert, in his area of expertise, backed by a career's worth of research, seems a little more likely to be correct than a random on the internet backed by nothing more that "nuh-uh!"
women who pay for studies to provide results are quite literally women.
Massless particle with promise for next-generation electronics discovered
Ok let me give you an example of a monad! The Maybe monad. In this case a monadified value either has a normal value, or it has a null. Ok, so for the operations. "return" should monadify a value. In this case it does this by creating a Maybe that has that value (Maybes that have null can not be created with return. They must be created in some other way.). The bind operation creates a new function that takes a Maybe value from one that doesn't. If the Maybe has a normal value then the function is run like normal. But if the Maybe has a null, the function is not run. Instead null is emitted directly.

Why is this a good thing? It means you can chain together many failure prone operations, and you only have to check for null at the end, not in the middle. So it works a little bit like exceptions.

Let's verify the laws:

1. We have some value, and some function that could take that value, and either emit a result, or a null. If we monadify our value, we get a Maybe that has that value. If we bind our function, and then run it with our Maybe, what happens? Well we know our Maybe is not null, because we just put in a totally legit value. So because of how we defined our bind, the function will run just like normal.

2. Ok so lets bind "return" and see what happens. If the input is a maybe that has null, then we never run "return" but just emit null. Consistent with identity!
If the input is a maybe with a normal value, then we run "return" with that value. Return creates a maybe that has that value. So we get out what we put in, it works!

3. There are a number of cases we have to go through but let's do them one by one.

First construction:
a) x is null. f_ skips f and just emits null. g_ skips g and just emits null.
b) x is non-null. first we put x in f_. Since x is not null we just apply f to the normal value. Now f can either emit a normal value or null.
b1) f emits null. g_ is skipped result is null.
b2) If result is not null, g is run with the normal result, and result of overall computation is g(f(normal argument))

Second construction:
a) x is null. g_f_ skips g_f and just emits null. Same result as before
b) x is not null. g_f is run with value in x. To run g_f we first run f. Two cases. f emits normal value or null.
b1) f emits null. g_ of null is null. So if value in x causes f to emit null we have null just as before.
b2) f does not emit null. g_ just runs g with normal result. So if value in x does not cause f to emit null, result of computation is g(f(normal argument))

So both constructions work the same, they continue running until problem arises.
Meanwhile, GivingTo.Science is sitting at $75

Is there a reason people would want to avoid newer domains like .science?
Silicon Valley Competitiveness and Innovation Project Report [pdf]
Very interesting reading a review that has to make the case that Tolkien should be taken seriously. And of course, he's quite right: not just that Tolkien should be taken seriously, but that (like Hopkins and others) he should be taken seriously (at least in part) because of the aesthetic theories implicit in everything he wrote.
There is an engine design that uses a small unshielded nuclear reactor to heat atmospheric air as a working fluid in a RAM jet, giving several months of flight time before the fuel runs out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersonic_Low_Altitude_Missil...

There are some significant drawbacks to this approach (assuming you managed to overcome the technical limitation of making everything work at the temperature and radiation involved) such as massive radiation leakage, which is why this was intended to be part of a weapon system that could drop nuclear bombs and then just spend its time flying around your enemies cities irradiating them until they shoot it down or it runs out of fuel, causing yet another nuclear disaster to deal with as it crashes.

The successful test run shows the design can work, so an external microwave heat source could do the same if you could transfer enough power.
I find the idea that I can write a weapon on my computer laughable and I can't see how the hacker community can justify attacks on freedom of speech. This is pre-emptive censorship and as such self evidently entirely morally wrong.
Got it from VisualStudio.com, there is an option at the bottom in the Downloads page to get the ISO which is the same as the one in MSDN (same SHA1 values listed) but has different file names.

Here's English Community: http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/B/C/0BC321A4-013F-4...
As you explain it, I understand it as event sourcing, as used in CQRS and event sourcing.

http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/EventSourcing.html
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj554200.aspx
Well, the last time it helped me was as a "reverse lookup" for math knowledge I never got the "right" way through education.

For example, one of the Google-Foobar puzzles involves how many ways you can order a line of different-height elements so that only a certain number are "visible" if you stood at one end of the line or the other.

First I tried to figure out how I would solve it for small numbers by hand, creating a spreadsheet of inputs. At one point, I got a grid of numbers where the "simpler" rows/columns had a sequence like 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 1, 6, 11, 6, which, through random googling and OEIS turned out to be "Unsigned Stirling numbers of the first kind"

http://oeis.org/A008275
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_numbers_of_the_first_...

Alas, I'm still no math-major... the comments in my solution contain: "I'm extremely proud of this boiled-down end-result... except that I'm not sure I can fully explain why it works."
_____ who harass _____ online are quite literally losers

Did we really need a study for this?
The Typescript compiler can emit JS for use with React from JSX. This is a good blog post about it: http://www.jbrantly.com/typescript-and-jsx/