skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A species is less likely to build resistance to a threat in environments where the threat is not present. I don't disagree with you except that we do need the damage in order to grow. It's precisely because of that damage that you feel so strongly and are among so many others trying to work out the problem.
The Basics of UX
Aliasing, for one.

Plus, array's are a first class feature in Fortran. "But Eigen!" you retort. Sure, except this library I want to use uses MTL4, this other library that I need uses uBlas, and this other one uses MKL. Ouch, ouch, ouch.

Pretty much if you can write Matlab you can write very highly performant Fortran without doing anything too special. Dealing with incompatible libraries, templates, and all the other stuff that C++ subjects you to is not 'easy'.
Foulab, Montréal's first hackerspace
> Wouldn't the average consumer like a product that was easily serviceable?

The answer to this is a resounding "no".
> who do you sue?

This is very strange to me. You sue Comcast, the corporation, of course. There's nothing inherent to the label "people" that allows people to own property or have accounts, nor anything inherent to the label "corporations" the prevents corporations from owning property and having accounts. We could call them "non-person property-holders" or "obbgobblegooks" for all I care, and decide on whatever rules we want.

Isn't it generally quite clear when an owner is purchasing something personal with their own money as opposed to when an owner is authorizing a purchase of something for their corporation with the corporation's money? In theory, what's to prevent us from declaring that corporations are not people, are allowed to have money, property, goods, and debt and are not allowed to spend their money on, among other things, advertising?

This isn't to say that doing so prevents any sort of non-individual spending on advertising. But saying that "corporations have to be people" and "we can't impose any additional control over corporation spending because actually the owners do the spending" seems irrelevant and incorrect.
And an additional problem, especially at larger & lower margin companies, is that managers have an extremely limited bonus pool and probably also don't have permission to issue annual merit increases. This results in shuffling bonus money around in ways that make no logical sense. For example, I'd need a couple additional hands worth of fingers to count the times I've passed over someone for a bonus because they had received a promotion or a significant salary increase in the past few months. Is that fair? Absolutely not. But the alternative was that another solid employee would get neither a salary bump or a bonus, which was worse.

Ultimately, I found the best policy while working under these conditions was to be blunt & open with all my staff over how I planned to handle salary increases, promotions & bonuses, so at least I could assuage their fears that it was n't consistent in addition to not being fair.

Big corporations usually suck at talent management and compensation.
> just every day you're in danger of losing a drive by a small statistical amount.

Which is why for important data I always use some sort of RAID (or cloud syncing). If I lose a drive I won't lose all my data (presumably though if I bought both drives at the same time there is a chance that both could fail at the same or close to the same time).

> That said, if you're running your ReadyNAS with raid 10 (mirrored drives in a RAID 0 config)

ReadyNAS and other products use a special type of RAID that is actually kind of clever (that will use all space regardless of disk size). I know many would criticize the special RAID but I've had more issues with Linux software RAID than I have had with ReadyNAS (nothing related to data loss). But suffice it to say if 1 drive fails then in theory the data should still be ok (at least that is what their claim to fame is).

My personal opinion - I feel like the ReadyNAS will die before the drives. I'm not saying they couldn't or won't die - but I feel like that would be highly unlikely and even more unlikely for more than 1 to fail at once.

Maybe I'm just paranoid - but when I worked on my last SAN it felt like the company used the cheapest possible drives with a short MTBF for the simple reason that my employer would have to keep using them and keep paying for their warranty service (this wasn't a big name like Dell).
More or Less (BBC Radio 4) – Greece Special
I had no idea there were just straight music podcasts. Thanks for the tip!
Which is a nice way of saying that Greg Miller is putting on airs without running his work by a native speaker.
If a process has a stream socket open to another process, or to another system over the network, what happens to that socket when the process is "thawed"?

How about if it's listening on a TCP port -- what happens if that port is in use by another process when the original one is thawed?
I have precisely the same fears. I have been relying on Glassdoor, which seems risky at best. A self-reported internal spreadsheet would be a lot more helpful.
As someone who's only been on the outside of OpenStack's community, but interested and learning about it a little here and there, could someone give a brief overview of major players and why it seems a number of individuals involved in the OpenStack community have burned out?

Is it really as bad as this post suggests? Many technologies become heavily burdened by too much (non-development) investment and companies doing a land grab on a hot new product; is that the case here?
I don't think advertising is anywhere near as effective as you think it is.
It's easy to re-open a file (assuming it's still there), but with sockets your IP may have changed, the remote IP may have changed (which you may have stored in your working memory that got checkpointed), DNS may point you to a different service entirely, you could have had to do some kind of port knocking or something to get that connection open in the first place.

I know this kind of stuff is being worked on so VMs/containers/namespaces can be moved around but it seems to be one of those things that gets really complicated when you try to do it transparently for userspace.
Strider Bikes Rule Video Contest – Jacob on His Ducati, Age 3
PayPal IPO and the Coming Consolidation in Daily Fintech Index
"He just conjectures that there would be no efficient algorithm for encoding (e.g.) chess positions as states of a waterfall. This actually seems fairly unlikely."

I think you're answering a different question than Scott. You seem to be answering "Can I construct a water-based computer that looks like a waterfall that could solve a chess problem, set up the initial parameters, and read the answer off the bottom?" This is conceivable. It is likely it would involve a highly implausible object of highly implausible accuracy and reliability, but if such an object existed it would still be a polynomial calculation to produce it. (Or, at least, a polynomial calculation could produce an object, if not the optimal one. The lack of solution to the Navier-Stokes equations might prevent you from finding an optimal one. And you might find yourself having some trouble with quantum effects. But such are the problems in the real world.) And our polynomial approximation is still not going to look like a waterfall as it will inevitably need looping constructs where state flows "back" uphill... if you want it to be one-way like a waterfall that is going to be exponentially large.

Scott's question is a different one. Given a real world waterfall that you have not constructed, but simply come across, can it be said to be computing the solution to a chess problem? Is a random rock that is sitting on the ground, jiggling away with atoms in constant motion that all the computers in the world could not possibly provide enough computational power to fully simulate, able to be said to be computing something with all that power? Could a boulder be sitting there simulating a human mind? I don't mean in the pan-psychic sense, I mean, literally, is it simulating a human mind? It has the computational capacity, when considered in the raw.

This is where Scott's argument kicks in, where the mapping is doing all the work.

Further evidence of this is that even if you want to sit here and argue that this boulder that is sitting in front of us (metaphorically) really and truly is calculating the state of your mind as well, well, with another equally sensible (and exponential and impossible) mapping, it's also calculating mine, it's also calculating Attila the Hun's, and it's also calculating the brain states of the final human being to ever live, and also deer's brains and the solutions to world hunger and pretty every other interesting thing ever, really. The contortions required to create the mapping of boulder state to human brain state are such that you can fit literally almost anything into it, and therefore, it is reasonable to point out that it is meaningless. It's an interesting argument that provides a surprisingly rigorous line that allows us to say that, no, that waterfall is not solving a chess problem or anything else... it really is, well, a waterfall.
Here is the mp3 - http://open.live.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/5/redir/version/2.0...

Everyone should listen to More or Less - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrss1/episodes/downloads
Probably also less susceptible to accelerated aging caused by on-off cycles.
I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted - here of all places. To me, it seems trivially true that Apple makes one decision regarding trade-offs (e.g.: iPhone thickness vs battery life) an everyone who doesn’t like it can only grin & bear it or take their business elsewhere. Like you, I’d like to see a little flexibility in this area.
I understand this can't go 'right', but are those things more difficult than filehandles to files that have been deleted?
Why do ad blockers not hide social media links? I would love this. It is cruft I deal with every day. I have never used this feature but been forced to implement it so many times.
Could you provide examples?

The stuff I'm thinking of that would plugin to Firefox or Photoshop probably do things that would already be allowed (read/write files, allocate memory, access network).

Either way this seems like an extremely simple way to lock down all the little command line utilities and small programs that make up a working unix system, so that if someone does get arbitrary command execution by other programs it gets much more difficult to chain exploits.
IPs, DNS settings change on running programs all the time, that doesn't seem as unusual as re-opening a file that's actually not there. A unix socket is an interesting mixed case :)
Hmmm? "Cекрет" is a noun. "Cекретно" is an adverb. Why is "Cекрет" inappropriate here?
My two main languages I work in are C# and Scala. Hands down I prefer the latter. The only pro in the C# column is the fact that Visual Studio is (finally) pretty nice. Otherwise Scala is just better. So much better inference, pattern matching, currying, less syntactic noise, higher kinded types, implicit parameters, etc.
The article states: "The advertising industry consists of the buying and selling of your attention between third parties without your consent."

Mostly, I don't think that's true. When I turn on the TV to watch a show, I think I am consenting to some advertising being present, and naturally the TV station has sold that advertising time to some other company. Similar situation with websites, search engines, radio, newspapers, etc.

The only situation where I think the assertion might be true is when it comes to advertising in public areas, outdoors, etc. I don't think it's reasonable to argue that consent has been given in those circumstances.
Work remotely with anyone, anywhere
"Секрет" is more a social thing. Confidential information of bigger entities like government or business will be called "тайна".
Weird that Russians wouldn't use a native root for such a basic concept. Plenty of Slavic languages have variations on "tajna." Maybe it's some bureaucratic term using a Westernized root to be fashionable.
I'm not sure how removing a policy that "poor" employees can't take advantage of hurts them. The claim is that employees who can't afford to defer earnings are in effect denied access to the perk - it is therefore a regressive perk that widens the gap between those at the top end and those at the bottom end, regardless of how it shapes the overall incentive structure.

It definitely serves a legitimate business purpose, but the employees who can't afford to participate are relatively worse off. Taking away the perk removes one source of imbalance, at a slight cost to the people who could afford to take advantage of it. But like you say, "rich" employees have many other investment options.
Fly over Pluto in animated New Horizons video
>One of the unique requirements is that we must use accredited software. This means that we can’t just pull in third-party JAR files at will, but we can use anything already contained within the JDK.

This policy seems dubious to me. It forces the teams to roll their own immature versions of things rather than rely on heavily used (and thus heavily battle-tested) 3rd party libraries. (Any special code screening applied to internal code could also be applied to open-source 3rd party code too).
The operator console software for the Distributed Common Ground System is written in Java. So is at least some of the operator console software aboard the P-8 Posiden. Both of those cover "mission control" for their respective systems.
I don't believe I did. Whether the vehicle is a new project or an old one makes no difference. The destination is the same. I gave a fairly specific example, not a general rule.
Dalrymple (pseudonym) is one of the most trenchant writers on the British social scene today. (Or was. Can't keep up.)
Bill Cosby deposition reveals calculated pursuit of young women
Agreed. I've had other coworkers direct their anger at me when finding out I made more. And I've felt the glower of jealousy & feeling cheated when finding out someone else made more, even if I was being paid fairly.

In both cases, merit didn't even factor in to the equation. It doesn't seem to be a rational response.
Oh, and with regards to unlimited vacation (or parental leave, for that matter): if your company offers it, take it. Especially if you are a manager, and 10x especially if you are a founder or C-level person. If leadership doesn't take vacation, vacation is Not Taken.
Trade secrets of the oldest family firm in the US (2012)
> We seem to have vastly different ideas about why the things happen.

It seems to me that you two agree on the observable parts of the theory and disagree on the motivation, which relies on their state of mind and is therefore not observable as such.

So it seems more like you agree than disagree to me, at least with respect to the things which can be observed.
I think plenty of people have time to implement a good IMAP client, just not me because I have a job that is completely unrelated to writing mail clients.
A fair point, but I was being more specific. I meant if you even look at the active principles of most drugs, they stimulate hormonal responses and perhaps directly things we call "satisfying". So it's not a question of naiveness or not, it's the technical question on what distinguishes satisfaction generated by a drug, by a sport or by intellectual pursuit. For example, sports practice directly releases endorphins, which as the name says, is an endogenous morphin.

If they can't be fundamentally distinguished from a stimulatory point of view (my hypothesis), I'd say what distinguishes a drug to some activity we don't regard as addictive is simply that one is sustainable, leads to long term benefits while the other is unsustainable.
But then you can just fork() and run your exploit in the child process after it raises is permissions. I don't see how that could work.
Actually, no, as I will repeat, his link has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

I'm not new here. Been coming here since forever. Just have to get a new account every time I get fed up with near-Reddit like posts and type something. Just like now.
While impressive it's not clear why such a low phase noise oscillator is needed. This oscillator looks like it takes up lots of space and power. So some justification for the device should be presented. Furthermore its possible to create a robust FEC that would be tolerant of burst errors due to phase noise. So the paper is incomplete without some mention of phase noise and the FEC used.

Other than the high end parts used in this device, it is fairly low-tech compared to most modern communications systems. That is a good thing for something like this I guess.
Thank you for taking the time to write this contribution. For someone who is in the process of trying to join Google, it's extremely illuminating. One thing I've been wondering is, since the org structure is way flatter than most big orgs, is it at all possible for a candidate to tell what level (or hell, even the ladder) a given position is listed at?
They let them keep their centrifuges. They have everything they need to create nuclear weapons, and all of those things (including being able to dictate/schedule their own nuke inspector visits) are right there in the document. Whatever the "restrictions" spelled out in there, and whatever the "punishments", this document gives (or lets keep) everything Iran needs to continue developing nuclear weapons. That is what I am saying.
- Do not stand the victims in front of a brick wall.
Ask HN: Why does Postgres allow plain text password storage?
As described here: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/catalog-pg-authid.html

Isn't it bad security practice?
Now you are saying that we can't regulate corporate spending because can't regulate a non-corporate groups spending. It's like saying we can't stop kids from buying alcohol because we can't stop adults from buying alcohol. It makes no sense.

I think you have a reasonable point to make, but you are not being clear enough.
Hello Everyone,
Team communication is hard everyone knows about it and we also had a lot bad experiences having collaboration with distributed team so we build Hubbot that makes communication ease of use & super fast for globally distributed teams and improve collaboration by providing instant voice & video chat, easily searchable and instantly accessible documents, realtime shared editing, threaded discussion stream and feedback on documents.

Hubbot allow to assign task, manage team and easy way to connect with great Integrations list to improve your workflow.

Right now i m trying to get some feedback on
How we can increase distributed team workflow better?
What are the problems they face with remote communication?
> No they didn't. For Republicans Willie Horton was a story about a guy who killed someone on a weekend furlough. Only for Democrats was it about a black guy who killed someone on a weekend furlough.

You act as though it could have only been a racial issue if the Republicans had explicitly made it so, which is not how it works, and that by calling them out on it, Democrats made it into a racial issue, which is laughably disingenuous. Considering the obsession that Lee Atwater had with racial politics, and in light of the fact that he was a big part of how the Republicans ran campaigns in the 80s (not to mention that you still see echoes of those strategies even today), I guess you are certainly, totally, and kind of embarrassingly wrong, actually.
still down 2 days later...
Someone must have really screwed something up badly :/
Every food pretty much follows a Gaussian curve in terms of benefit. There's an ideal amount, with too little being bad, and too much being bad. All plants have some form of natural toxin as a defense against being eaten. Even broccoli has oxalic acid which can lead to kidney stones in high amounts. Cooking helps mitigate these, as well as sourcing from an organic farm or your back yard. But it's always safer to eat a variety of vegetables, so you distribute whatever toxins each one has, natural or man-made, and get varied nutrients. There's no silver bullet.
I've driven in an 80MPH zone near Tulsa
> Consider in the 1800s it wasn't uncommon for a publisher to be paid for a product & make it seem like they were simply endorsing something they truly liked.

Since you work in advertising, you should know that that kind of thing is more pervasive than ever today.
Why is "brand equity" a thing?

It shouldn’t be. "brand equity" is the issue that’s wrong with today’s market.

Often I can get the exact same product to a far cheaper price if I’m just willing to accept a cheaper-looking label.

And, while that’s very popular in Germany, and led to the rise of Aldi, Lidl, etc, it’s not enough.

Brand equity, as you call it, is the effect that we trust companies based on irrational ideas. That’s actually bordering on violating the EU advertising laws (you can only advertise stuff that is directly related to the product, you can only say stuff that is true, etc).
I need asm tutorials now
you know i am really pissed off right now with all this bull shit talk on letting the assembler change your c code into asm, but i dont want to learn c i want to learn asm and i need to know it fast, i got a Compaq Presario 7360 and i am waiting for the graphics card to come in so i can get started. all i want is tutorials on asm i dont want any new functions they added, and i dont need an explanation on the memory and how to use it, thats the whole reason i got an old computer, so i can use all the memory because windows has like 5 unused bits sitting there. any way i want tutorials now. and no bullshit trying to make me use c instead. just simple functions in asm and what they do. p.s i might have said i wanna learn fast i meant i want answers fast
There's nothing inherent to the label "people" that allows people to own property or have accounts, nor anything inherent to the label "corporations" the prevents corporations from owning property and having accounts. We could call them "non-person property-holders" or "obbgobblegooks" for all I care, and decide on whatever rules we want.

Yes, we could redefine the term "personhood" to (in the legal context) refer to something else, and then use the word "obbgobblegooks" to refer to the concept that personhood currently refers to.

In theory, what's to prevent us from declaring that corporations are not people, are allowed to have money, property, goods, and debt and are not allowed to spend their money on, among other things, advertising?

The same thing that prevents us from declaring that the constitution doesn't apply to printing presses; the free speech rights of their owners.

If you want to argue against Citizens United, and say that the government should be allowed to apply prior restraints to free speech that uses property, go ahead and do that. But none of this has anything to do with corporate personhood.

Similarly, your right to name your ship "SS Ilovebush" has nothing to do with ship personhood - that's just your free speech right as a guy with a ship and a paintbrush.
So I've been in the OpenStack community for a while [3+ years] (http://stackalytics.com/?metric=commits yes that's me down there in the pie chart); and I'd like to answer any questions anyone has...

Yes the OpenStack community isn't perfect (but I've heard the same thing about other communities, so meh).

Something I've found interesting to read over:

- https://lwn.net/Articles/647524/

Overall, no the community isn't perfect, yes there are issues, yes it burns some people out, but software isn't rainbows and butterflies after all.
How is paying people who are already wealthy more than people who are poor helping the poor?