* This exoplanet is now "Kepler-452b" (kepler_name),
* In the "Kepler Object of Interest" catalog, it's KOI "K07016.01" (kepoi_name),
* Its star is both K07016 and Kepler ID 8311864 (kepid),
* In the broader 2MASS sky survey, the star has the id "J19440088+4416392"
Sources (catalog search engines),
(edit): Here's a mirror of the Kepler catalog entries -- KIC for the star, KOI for the planet:
There are 259 stars within about 30 light years.Communication could be conceivable with such distances...
1. Does it have active plate tectonics?
2. Does it have a working deep carbon cycle?
3. Has its atmosphere hung on to its hydrogen (that is, has it managed not to lose it all to high-altitude UV splitting and solar wind)?
If the answer to all three of those is "yes" then this suddenly gets a lot more interesting, whether or not we can see any free oxygen in the atmosphere. And while we won't be able to get answers to them using current technology, next-generation direct-observation planet seeking telescopes might be able to deliver within the 15-30 year time scale (if the astrophysicists I know are correct).
And slides here (currently on Figure 10) http://www.nasa.gov/keplerbriefing0723
EDIT booooo - audio stream has gone down
Looking at the images (aside from the artist interpretation), it looks like they're just guessing based on size and location?
No FTL travel, no working cryonics, no mind-upload tech. Just harsh reality.
>> Kepler-452b is 60 percent larger in diameter than Earth and is considered a super-Earth-size planet.
>> Kepler-452 is 6 billion years old, 1.5 billion years older than our sun, has the same temperature, and is 20 percent brighter and has a diameter 10 percent larger.
I noticed the lack of "b" on that second one, but they seem to be talking about a single planet.
It might not be the most earth like exo-planet as Kepler-438b has an ESI score of 0.88.
"check out this planet, looks like a promising place once we run out of materials here."
Very cool that we can find it, but I don't think we'll be visiting this one any time soon...
On a serious note, I'm looking forward to the discovery of a smaller cousin. That seems to me to be more promising for life: Stuff in water oceans won't sink as readily, so will be able to absorb more sunlight. Avian species will find life easier going (predicated on a suitably dense atmosphere). Any advanced civilizations will have an easier time getting out of its gravity well, and so on.
EDIT: typing error
It's becoming increasingly clear that solar systems are quite common. As our planet detection abilities increase to smaller and smaller planets I believe we'll find more and more of those too. Some of these (like this one) will be in the habitable zone of a star. Some of those assumedly will develop life. Some of those will develop sentient life.
I just picture a timeline like Earth's projected on this planet, which of course has no basis in fact. But imagine a civilization that's had 2 billion years of life longer than ours?
That's a really long time obviously. It's hard to imagine that such a civilization couldn't develop automated methods to populate the local space around them. This is one of the counterarguments to life being common in the universe of course. At 1% of the speed of light you could populate the galaxy with autonomous robots in a "mere" 10 million years.
So our inability to detect anything like this gives weight to the argument that no such starfaring civilization exists or that they're less than ~10 milllion years old.
Was there civilization on this planet and it died out for some reason? We'll probably never know.
As these planets mount up (as I believe they will), it'll further strengthen the idea that we're basically doomed (ie the Great Filter) and further suggest we are a mere cosmic blink.
Are they like us? a civilization that loves going to war and colonize others? that is the most important thing we need to know.
The Wheezy image I use with LXC worked well enough, the minimal alpine image not so well, apk complaining about its database.
User name spaces support would be nice, then we can play with unprivileged containers.
And Overlayfs would be a nifty alternative to btrfs, it's in kernel 3.18, and 4.04 adds support for multiple lower layers. But this btrfs implementation is cool too. Cgroups support will be somewhere on that list too.
Cgroups and namespaces is in the kernel. General Linux ecosystem for networking, storage and distributed systems is already extensive. The possibilities are endless.
So now LXC, Docker, Rkt and Nspawn have Bocker for company.
The network, PID and mount namespaces are the ones unshared, plus a private /proc.
I like tools like this because they're reality checks on how the basics of Linux containers are just a few essential system calls, and particularly that they're limited.
The author of "bocker" (not my bocker) has a great idea. I would learn from the script. Docker is not magic anymore.!!
People give bash a hard time, but things like this really give me that warm, fuzzy feeling.
it might be interesting to see a version of your script using overlayfs
systemd-nspawn is nice because I run systemd in all my containers and thus allows me to easily do logging etc.
I don't really dig the docker-microservices mantra that much. I just use them as glorified VMs I guess.
(And yes, you should run an init system in your containers )
 - https://blog.phusion.nl/2015/01/20/docker-and-the-pid-1-zomb...
Is something watching for .cmd? Is this some behavior of util-linux (for which, my few seconds couldn't find solid documentation on)?
Is there a certain process that goes into developing something like this, and why is this a popular thing to do? (writing an existing software in lesser lines)
echo 'nameserver 188.8.131.52' > "$btrfs_path/$uuid"/etc/resolv.conf
They are afforded terrible powers to intervene in, and disrupt, someone's life. That trade is made under the assumption that they do a dangerous job.
A benefit is afforded to them due to the responsibility that they bear.
Obviously, they want to have as much power with as little danger as possible. They want to maximize the benefit the receive (largely being above the law and a middle class existence) and minimize the repercussions of what they owe for it (possibly being in danger).
Its the same in other areas of American life where elites have abdicated their responsibilities but have become accustomed to the benefits afforded them to the point that they think it's owed to them. That has to change.
EDIT: for clarification and spelling.
That is dereliction of a police officer's duty. The entire purpose of a police force is to investigate potential crimes, and then, if it is determined that a crime has occurred, to arrest those involved. This man, a shift commander, is literally saying that their policy is to shoot first and ask questions later. He should, at a minimum, be fired. Additionally, if he has actually structured his department in a way that has officers arresting people without prior investigation, he and all others carrying out this policy should be criminally prosecuted for false imprisonment.
On the way back at night, driving through a small town in central Massachusetts, I passed a cop car, going at the speed limit. The cop immediately pulled out and began tailing me, but did not turn on his lights.
I tried to maintain a constant speed, a couple miles above the 35 mile per hour speed limit, since I know cops treat excessively slow speeds as an indicator of drunk driving.
Eventually, after 15 minutes of being tailed, I hit my foot a bit too heavily on the gas, and went to 45 miles per hour. He instantly turned on his lights, and pulled me over.
The officer was extremely skeptical when he got to the car, especially since the name on the car's registration was my company's, not mine, and I had two minors in the back. After some questioning and prodding about where we had been and what we had been doing, he let me go with a warning.
I shudder to think what would have happened if I had pulled over in the same situation, but black. The officer was serving no sort of duty except to troll for problems where none existed.
I haven't returned to the US since: it turns out there are many places I can live where I don't have to have nerve-wracking interactions with hostile law enforcement, ever.
When a man's job depends on him apprehending suspects, then he will find a way to create more suspects for which to apprehend.
The bigger problem is that the policies & incentives are built to reinforce this. They get promotions/assets based on forfeiture laws, weapons based on Pentagon Surplus & publicity based on Shootouts. No one ever got promoted for not shooting a (potentially innocent) suspect. Very very rarely does a cop get prosecuted for pulling a gun or inflicting other violence.
SO put a bunch of arrogant, power seeking people in a system which glorifies violence & rewards forfeitures. What else do you expect?
I think that sums it up well. Many police officers do indeed act like they don't understand the risks or even purpose of their own jobs. Policing has become an end in and of itself. It's no longer about protecting and serving but about policing and arresting and jailing. It doesn't matter if there is no crime, people will be arrested. It doesn't matter if there is serious crime, low-level offenders will be the primary target. And of course, nothing is more important than officer safety. These officers are cowards who should be ashamed of themselves. They don't have an altruistic bone in their body and probably wouldn't lift a finger to save a baby out of a burning building. It is the citizens' lives that matter, that the police are sworn to protect. It is the citizens they serve. But that indeed has been lost.
Given all this, is it any wonder that much of the population no longer trusts police, many from negative personal experiences? The author is right. Until there is a huge shift in the way police treat citizens, this problem of trust will get worse. For many, it is a problem of hate, and in many cases, rightly so.
Yet the police and many other people insist that the change has to come from citizens. If only we give up our guns. If only we give up our freedoms. These things just make the problem worse by blaming the victims and forcing the citizens to give up even more for the well being of the police.
There is no movement from the pro police camp, and it's been their turn for decades now. Until there is, hate and animosity from the community will continue to grow.
The citizens here are to blame. The police are just giving the public what it wants. It's a county full of McMansions and extreme paranoia. Lots of upper middle class people terrified that their fragile existence might be upset by [Mexican immigration, terrorism, <insert fear here>]. I'm not sure if 9/11 was a turning point per se, but planes crashing into the Pentagon in neighboring Arlington didn't help.
It wasn't always like this. When I was growing up you'd almost never see a Fairfax County cop. Vienna was always a police state, but the small-bit speed-trap kind. Today, there are cops crawling around Tysons (where the biggest danger is rowdy teenagers).
 It's notable that this story takes place just across the Potomac from where those parents got in trouble with the police for letting their kids walk home less than a mile from school.
The same was clearly true in the United States' early approach to counter-insurgency in Iraq, as described in this piece, where the life of an American soldier is clearly much more valuable to the US Government than those of the Iraqi civilians we went to 'save'.
The sad thing is the comparison I would always quote was "what would the police do in the United States, if you had a dangerous criminal surrounded by civilians?" They probably wouldn't use an airstrike, they would probably use some other technique with a higher risk to the police, but a lower risk to the civilians they are sworn to 'protect and serve'
This article (and lots of other data) suggests that is changing: if everyone is a suspect until proven innocent, there is no need for police restraint. The worse that can happen is a dead 'perp' I guess...
This seems like the thing police forces need to change in order to fix the situation.
I'm not sure this is true. If it were, why would they put themselves into potentially violent situations? It seems to me the priorities are
1. Make the arrest.2. Officer safety.3. Public safety.4. Justice.
In that order. They are related, to get 4 you sometimes need 1-3. But not always.
'Militarised police' is correct, because this corresponds exactly to what we'd want of our warfighters.
1. Carry out the mission.2. Be safe.3. Keep 3rd parties safe.4. Be ethical and moral.
It's a far cry from 'to protect and serve'. Personally I'd be happy with a squatter in an empty apartment getting away more often in return for not deploying an armed raid with no confirmation based on a single report.
That's nuts. At least they haven't gone that crazy in Norway - the police instruction on firearms are still: "Only aim at someone you're authorized to kill" -- eg: someone posing an immediate threat that can't be avoided by de-escalating the situation (so it's not enough for someone to threaten to kill a police officer, if that officer can easily back away and secure the area/wait for backup -- but more along the lines of someone aiming a gun at someone).
And this makes more sense to me too: Everyone is entitled to self-defense if they fear for their life -- if someone threaten you with a deadly weapon -- be that a knife or a gun, it's entirely rational to try and kill them in order to save yourself. You might of course serve out the rest of your life in prison if you make the wrong call -- but you'll be alive.
Just because someone is a cop, doesn't mean they can't be(come) a murderer. This is why it's so important for police to practice restraint. They work for us, not against us after all (or should, anyway).
For Violent Crime in 2011, it ranked 46th of the 50 states. Property Crime was 43rd.
The Federal & State Incarceration Rate was 13th, and general funds spending on corrections (2008), it was ranked 11th highest.
Sometimes Europeans are alarmed by the high US incarceration rates, with our 700-800 per 100,000 over twice most other countries. If you want your eyes to just pop out of your head though look at the state by state numbers. (The US is a big place, and all social trends are not perfectly distributed.) Louisiana incarcerates over 1400 of its 100,000, four to fourteen times most other countries. The one thing you can say for Louisiana, though, is that it also has over double the national murder rate. So maybe it has other endemic problems that are running both numbers up simultaneously.
Virginia's up there in incarceration with 900-1000 per 100k, but it doesn't have the violent crime stats that could even attempt to excuse it. It has below average homicide and violent crime rates.
It's a high incarceration state for no damn reason.
In Switzerland every male has a military type machine gun and two magazines at home and in my country, Austria, there are regions that rival Texas in terms of gun ownership.
Today I tend to believe that this might be a problem of city planning (and preventing ghettos). The US has cities that are much larger than the largest cities in the countries cited by me. But I might be wrong here.
Anyways, I do not doubt that police in Austria and Germany would act no differently than in the US if they had reason to expect that they could be shot every time they stopped a car. Thankfully this is not the case.
Or do they just get even more set into the us vs. them and we know what's better for the dumb masses mindset?
I would love to hear an actual cop's opinion on how the recent media coverage has affected his/her individual performance and the overall performance of the police force in general.
this feeds into a problem that is a corollary to the above, which is the whole see something/say something mentality with no repercussions for those that call the police on others...
Which we hear about all the time. So WTF?
In any event, why would a squatter merit such a hostile response?
The officer involved shootings of unarmed people are consistently swept under the rug.
P.S. If they had raised a sudden firefight, where might some of the resulting rounds traveled and impacted, particularly in what might be a fairly population-dense apartment building(s) setting?
"In a very real sense, the 'middle class' is not an economic category, it's a social one. To be middle class is to feel that the fundamental institutional structures of society are, or should be, on your side. If you see a policeman and you feel more safe, rather than less, then you can be pretty sure you're middle class. Yet for the first time since polling began, most Americans in 2012 indicated they do not, in fact, consider themselves middle class."http://gawker.com/ferguson-and-the-criminalization-of-americ...
The author still argues in favor of policing. (Just like he doesn't question whether he had any right to invade another country.) Advocating that police return to his side, against the common domestic enemy.
A first step is freedom of the press so that citizens can become informed.
A second step is for problems to beexposed in the press as in the OP.
A third step is for citizens in thearea with such problems to informtheir elected officials that the policeneed better supervision to solve the problems.
Fourth, with enough concern from votingcitizens, the political supervisionof the police needs to tell the policechief, etc. to clean up their act.
If problems continue, then the mayor,etc. needs to get the Chief of Policea new job, say, cleaning the sidewalkswith a toothbrush -- "Get'm nice andclean, now, y'hear. Good to see youdoing well at the work you are bestsuited for.".
With more concern, lawyers, includingthe local prosecutors, can bring legalcases against the police. As inBaltimore now, a few serious legalcases against the police can calm down the whole police force like a fewmillion pills of Valium.
Net, via our democracy, the power,essentially all of the power, reallyoverwhelming power, is fully in thehands of the voting citizens. Allcitizens have to do is find a sympathetic candidate and pull a leverin a voting booth.
With any kind of serious activityby voting citizens, police arrogancecan disappear like a snowball in a hot July in Vegas.
The police need to be worried now:Somewhere in the US is a billionairewho believes in the US Constitutionand is ready to spend a little moneyto set up police sting operations,have hidden cameras recording everything,make a really big public story about theabuses, have teams of lawyersfilling the court dockets with everylegal case they can come up with,and then organizing some politicalactivity to get the politicians onboard.
The story for the police? Simple:Clean up your act on your own or the voters,politicians, and lawyers will do itfor you.
Too much of the police have talked tothemselves too much and talked themselvesinto believing a lot of nonsense reasonswhy they should treat the citizens likedirt. Well, that treatment and thosereasons won't cut it, not for even a minute,once the sunlight shines on the situation --instead, voters, politicians, and lawyershave the power, overwhelming power, and will stop the nonsense.
Some of the best ideas and tools on HN are met with so much negativity it reminds me of Reddit, where the small percentage of people who get off on putting others down so they can feel good about themselves dominate the comments.
Good on you cdjk, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you!
I also very much liked the idea of using `Range` headers for pagination (which should be out-of-band but rarely is).
I'm not convinced that this is the future of web development, but it's a nice refreshing view that contains a few very practical ideas.
Even if you don't care about this at all, spend the 12 minutes to watch the introductory presentation.
It's like all those web framework inventors didn't read past chapter 2 of their database manuals. So they wrote a whole pile of code that forces you to add semantics in another language elsewhere in your code in a language that makes impedance stark. PostgreSQL is advanced technology. Whatever you might consider doing in your CRUD software, PostgreSQL has a neat solution. You can extend SQL, add new types, use PL/SQL in a bunch of different languages, background workers, triggers, constraints, permissions. Obviously there are limits but you don't reinvent web servers because Apache doesn't transcode video on the fly. Well, you do if you're whoever makes Rubby on Rails.
The argument that you don't want to write any code that locks you to a database is some stunning lack of awareness, as you decide to lock yourself into the tsunami of unpredictability that is web frameworks to ward off the evil of being locked into a 20 year database product built on some pretty sound theoretical foundations.
Web developers really took the whole "let's make more work for ourselves" idea and ran with it all the way to the bank.
You'd have to pay me a million dollars a year to do web development.
And what happens when you start applying complex business rules that needs to scale? So many questions about this approach...
it does same kinda stuff + capable of loading Node.js modules, compatible with MongoLab's REST API and Firebase's real-time API
I find it intriguing, but maybe I am just one generation behind and you were to say:
"Been there done that. This strong dependency on the database was really not a good idea in the long run because... "
Wont this lock you in with very hard coupling between your db schema and public REST API?
I'd say if the OPTIONS would return a JSON Schema (+ RAML/Swagger) instead of the json-fied DDL, it would be even more awesome. With a bit of code generation this would be super-quick to integrate in the frontend then.
If you are using this as a web server persistence backend, I would agree with the first, more or less accept the second and reject the third. HTTP + JSON serialisation are way slower for that kind of job.
If you are just exposing the database using only the Postgres, in that case is interesting, however, I have concerns about how more complex business logics would work with such a CRUD view.
CRUD over HTTP (or an "access API") should be a first step, not your end goal.
Second, I'm an author of a distributed database (VC backed, open-source), so I'd like to respond to some of opinions on databases voiced in this thread - particularly in the branched discussions. If you aren't interested in those responses, you can ignore the rest of my comment.
- "You'd have to pay me a million dollars a year to do web development." Don't worry, most webdev jobs are about a tenth of that. If inflation goes up even a little bit...
- "The problem is scaling your database", I can confirm that this is my experience as well. But there is a very specific reason for that. Most databases are designed to be Strongly Consistent (of the CAP Theorem) and thus use Master-Slave architecture. This ultimately requires having a centralized server to handle all your writes, and this becomes extraordinarily prone to failure. To solve this, I looked into Master-Master (or Peer-to-Peer / Decentralized) algorithms for my http://gunDB.io/ database. Point being, I'm siding with @3pt14159 in this thread.
- "Sorry but databases are just a hole to put your shit in when you want it out of memory", I write a database and... uh, I unfortunately kind of have to agree, probably at the cost of making fun of my own product. You see, the reason why is because most databases now a days are doing the same thing - they keep the active data set in memory and then have some fancy flush mechanism to a journal on disk and then do some cleanup/compression/reorganizing of the disk snapshot with some cool Fractal Tree or whatever. But it does not matter how well you optimize your Big O queries... if the data isn't in memory, it is going to be slow (to see why, zoom in on this photo http://i.imgur.com/X1Hi1.gif ). You just can't get the performance (or scale) without preloading things into RAM, so if your database doesn't do that... well what @batou said.
Overall, I urge you to listen to @3pt14159 and @batou. PostgreSQL is undeniably awesome, but please don't fanboy yourself into ignorance. Machines and systems have their limitations, and you can't get around them by throwing more black boxes at it - your app will still break and so will your fanboyness.
In fact, I think I love any musical reference in software :-)
Of course, it is all counterfactual, but could Airbnb have been as successful had they not joined YC? Recall that PG told them to do things that do not scale - by taking professional photos of rentals in NY - which may have been critical to their early success.
And although PG was initially skeptical of their idea, he quickly changed his thinking about how big Airbnb could become. Revealed in another interesting trail of emails exchanged between PG and Fred Wilson (who also passed on Airbnb). 
 "In fact, when we funded Airbnb, we thought it was too crazy. We couldn't believe large numbers of people would want to stay in other people's places"
It's so important that YC went through the effort to codify the process: http://www.ycombinator.com/handshake/
The timeline is weird.
Reality: $500M in revenue in 2014
Moral: Even the most successful startups don't hit their seed-stage revenue projections :)
The deal isn't done until the money is in the bank
Any middle ground between "highly valuable" and "disaster"?
Here's the story in one sentence: an angel recognized Airbnb's potential but never got the deal in writing so they used it as leverage for a better offer.
Paige invested in Lyft, Twitter and Postmates. He's doing fine and learned from this.
Thanks for sharing this Paige. Excellent write up and valuable lessons learned.
* Within the first weeks first revenue
* Within 4 months numbers that by themselves each look promising (40-60% response rate although crap product, good revenue per night, good nights booked, etc)
Personally i dont expect any of those metrics nowadays to be further away than 1.5-2x better
The "only" big q's left is:
* is the market big enough it's worth scaling the quantity
* is that team capable of doing it
I feel like i am missing something here (obviously i judge from hindsight) but what about this numbers is "bad metrics"?
> On a tactical level, I repeat this creative destruction almost weekly as I analyze an individual deal; on an operational level I do it every few months (re-evaluating my deal flow, co-investor network, deal structures, etc.); at a strategic level I sit down almost every year and question my overall philosophy on founders, theses, markets, etc.
[shorter: I don't only regret my mistakes but also try to learn from them.]
Otherwise a well-told story. Thanks.
That's supposed to be considered a bummer :).
Hey, at least you still have your money !
In fact, who knows, maybe with your investment, Airbnb wouldn't have turned out that great after all.
Maybe you would have lost your money, which would have reduced your reputation and you would have ruminated over it, got depressed, separated, started using drugs and drinking, get arrested for a drunk mishap, resisting arrest and attacking an officer with a tennis ball, then jail time... the wheel of misfortune once set in motion is hard to stop :).
YC is at the center of a large network of investors, startups and bloggers and somehow its investment decisions ultimately influence the habits of technology consumers in general.
I think it was a lose-lose situation for the author.
But the NOAA satellites (and quite a few other satellites) use a circularly polarized signal, and for just a tiny bit more money (perhaps the cost of the dongle) you can make a MUCH better antenna for circularly polarized signals. Some designs are just helixes made with coax cable, some are just a couple of wires in an x-shape.
Google is your friend, and building an antenna is a fun cheap weekend project and will greatly enhance your results when hunting for satellite signals.
P.S. if you make a circularly polarized antenna and you discover that you made a LH polarization instead of the RH that you wanted (or vice versa), just turn the antenna upside down. It may behoove you if you are planning on listening to signals with both polarities to construct one that is easily flipped over.
Did some digging and there's a whole load of things which can potentially be picked up, including dead satellites . RTL-SDR.com has a whole load of awesome looking tutorials .
 http://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-dead-satellites-rtl-sdr/ http://www.rtl-sdr.com/category/tutorial/
But before that, I decided I wanted a proper "hardware radio", and bought myself a portable wide band radio receiver  (great value for the price, I advice it). Then when I was about to get one of these dongles, as usual and as for the above radio, I got sucked into the reviews suggesting this or that other model for better sensitivity or extra features. Now I understand the price range for these cheap sticks is just in the order of a few tenths at maximum, but maybe there is a chance anyone has investigated a bit more on the available choices already?
For example.. the one that has been written about in the article has 4 stars and 159 reviews while the first alternative in the "Amazon recommends" box has some 940 reviews and same 4 star score for just +2 (but I'm not even sure they do exactly the same things.. sorry). So, just wondering, maybe someone has already gone through this search and can recommend the best one to get?
Then I configured the tcp server, rtl_tcp to forward the packets to my workstation. This allowed me to put the Pi in a location more suited to receive transmissions, i.e. not next to RF emitting servers and power supplies. Then, using Gqrx with remote server, I analysed the results.
Most of them seem to have the same two chips in them, RTL2832U and R820T. Does anyone see an issue with this item I linked to? Some people were mentioning quality issues with generics.
(I'm aware he might have other sources for the title, but it's still misleading)
Or would the star near it just haze everything too much?
Is it impossible to observe a planet in more detail like that without travelling next to it?
Is there a source? If not, it makes sense to change this title to "NASA to make announcement that 'astronomers are on the cusp' of finding 'another earth.'"
(They mention the upcoming announcement, but they dont know know what it is about either.)
EDIT: Unless that list was literally just updated with ESI 0.98 planet this thread is referring to...
However, The stream has reached "maximum capacity" at this time.
its 1400 light years awayin habitable zoneand the sun is 8% different than ours (don't quote me on the 8% but its very close in size)
Back in the day, I used to play this on my linux computer in my room with my brother -- it was one of the games that got me into coding / development in the first place.
I hope they find some good developers to carry the game onwards! It'd be a shame if such an awesome, free game ended up going extinct.
Is it any wonder open source gaming struggles with this kind of broad negativity?
Battle for Wesnoth is an excellent game. But declining interest seems to indicate that maybe it is just finished?
I'm not saying that a rewrite is the answer, however.
Edit: okay, sourceforge is broken for me for any download, no matter the browser.
Let's consider that my sourceforge rant of the week.
New System, new Language, use the good parts rewrite the bad parts.
And new Language would make it more interesting for "younger" developer that start with e.g. Rust / Go / Whatever. (That did not mean the code will be better)
Two things are clear:
1 - you have time to be prolific in open source
2 - you have significant Python skills
Seems like you fit the bill for what Wesnoth needs! Why not step in and help yourself? I don't want to come across as calling you out here - I'm genuinely interested in learning why, because I maintain many open source projects myself and I want to know some of the reasons why skilled programmers who appreciate projects don't contribute to them.
In fact in this situation you would be better off with Wesnoth as GPL rather than MIT, because that way your closed-source competitors can't use your component in their games.
I wish this had been included in the main body of this post, with some metrics; everyone you know uses it because it makes the web suck so much less.
Loading The Verge's article in a Chrome incognito window: 19.6 MB transferred, finished in 41.9 s, huge ad covering the entire page above the developer console I had open to watch things load.
Same article in a new incognito window with Adblock Plus enabled: 1.5 MB transferred, finished in 16.94s.
 - https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/20/9002721/the-mobile-web-su...
I don't like tracking scripts either but why can't the ad networks get together and create a shared script instead of so many that seem to be redundant?
I wonder if that is going to be what it takes to fix today's bloat problems: Google takes the hammer to sites that too much advertising cruft. Otherwise, I don't see business makers seeing much of a reason to fix it on their own.
Emacs built in web-browser, or "eww" (that's its name). It's sort of like Lynx or w3m, except you can click things and it shows actual images!
You can see it here: http://imgur.com/FqJVB0U
You know what? The site and all content loads instantly. It may not be beautiful, but it works a hell of a lot better and is just so feather light it feels surreal.
Maybe I'll seriously start using eww for more stuff. This was surprisingly nice.
Not to mention their recent move to close Comments being a cynical strategy to get people using their forums.
Realise that's OT but wanted to get it off my chest.
Sites are loading up on anything and everything to offset costs and it's only getting worse with adblock. And ad networks are just built with poor engineering and no attention paid to the user's experience. It's too easy to whip up a basic ad server and just load a dozen more tags on a page with the focus being volume and clicks. Unfortunately, there isn't an easy way to fix things because of the way money flows.
Disclaimer: I'm the founder of a digital ad network.
I'm curious as to how that could ever be done. I feel that it's almost impossible without somehow getting user information. I feel the trend is that ads are going to continue to be tuned to people and aspects about them. Maybe fully homomorphic encryption can do that without violating privacy but that's a long way off.
> Here's another idea: Almost a year ago, I heard the notion of "Subscribe 2 Web" at Mozilla. The gist is that you're worth about $6.20 per month across publishers via advertising revenues. What if you paid that much into an account yourself every month and used a mechanism built into your browser to distribute that money? Yeah, it's micropayments, but I find it interesting that these folks came up with a specific dollar amount that doesn't sound terrible.
It exists. It's called Contributor by Google: https://www.google.com/contributor/welcome/. If anybody needs an invite please let me know.
7MB was about the install size of Microsoft Windows 3.0, a complete (if crummy) OS.
Seems reasonable. bwahahaha!
Shall we discuss the number of DNS requests?
And how many of those offsite servers are using something convoluted like Amazon for DNS? (which I find is more and more prevalent thanks to AWS)
The blog author, e.g., is using Amazon for DNS.
Alas, for each and every name, this adds more than a few lookups to what could be a 1-2 request process. Amazon uses multiple levels of indirection.
This dance is not of much consequence in the case of a single name.
But in the aggregate, e.g., many names requested from one overloaded site (such as one author singles out) after another, it does add up.
This also creates a larger margin for errors (failed lookups getting retried and timing out, again and again... while the user sits and waits).
Perhaps websites just need to die altogether, and instead we'll just use APIs. You choose how to render the content in your browser according to your desires. Oh wait....RSS.
To use some of the examples in the article, not everyone can rely on national license fees (BBC), corporate sponsorship (NPR), consistently making a loss (The Guardian), search engines (Mozilla), having a legacy business (CNN) etc.
I wonder which kinds of proposals you would suggest. It should also cover analytics.
The i-Loo featured an internet-enabled monitor on the cubicle wall and a special printer that would allow users to print information on a standard toilet paper roll.
Anyway, when you turned on the light a little disco ball would light up and some high energy pop song would play: "I Want to Break Free," "YMCA".. something like that.
It was the talk of the town.
iLoo seems like a bad idea, but for an unconventional marketing campaign, doing something with festival toilets is not a bad idea. If you've seen Better Call Saul's talking toilet, that would be a particularly impactful approach.
It would have promoted the brand to be sure, just not in the direction they wanted.
I wonder if they were inspired by Apple to use an iName. But then, internet was the best excuse ever for the ridiculous leading vocal.
When at your friends house, subtly announce to them that you need a poo by asking for their wifi password.
If a VC wants to own 20% at the end of an A, or 10% after a B, having YC in there with rights to buy back up to their 7% can add real dilution you wouldn't have otherwise wanted or needed to incur. As someone who did a party round seed and had a crowded A, it really does add up; though, it's for sure a first world problem and won't kill you, whereas YC for many companies is when they get serious.
YC is so valuable that this won't turn anyone off at the traditional YC early stage, but I wonder how this will affect things for the "late-early" companies they've been taking more of in the last few batches.
YC is an innovative venture capital firm whose model depends heavily on its maintaining credibility with the talented founders who run the ventures it funds. In this sense, it has caught the spirit of the age brilliantly and that is why YC stands out as one of the premier investment firms of our era.
A key element in this approach is for YC to do what it has done all along and that is to take common stock instead of the almost sacrosanct preferred stock that VC firms have always insisted on in the past. This radical innovation in VC-style funding has set YC apart from the pack of VC firms, incubators, and any and all other manner of investor wanting to hitch their wagon to the talented founders who are capable of building successful, massively scaling ventures that seek to transform all of world commerce. Its importance cannot be emphasized enough as a key to YC's success. It has enabled YC both to be in the midst of the fray and to stand above it, all at the same time. It is the founder's ally even while it benefits mightily as an investor.
What then to do after the founding stage to avoid dilution to its initial investment stake without jeopardizing credibility with founders? If YC were to pick and choose in participating in early follow-on rounds, this would selectively help and simultaneously hurt the various founders it works with. Almost by definition, the fact of such an investment would brand some YC ventures as in and others out of YC favor, a result that would prove highly damaging to the aura of goodwill that is not only helpful but absolutely indispensable for YC to maintain with its founders.
So how to maintain that goodwill and still avoid subsequent dilution in the various investment rounds that inevitably follow from the inception of star-quality companies?
Well, you can set up some fixed rules, make such follow-on pro rata investments automatic within the defined bounds that make sense for YC, and use that as a way of extending YC's leverage to help it keep the 7% (or whatever) stake it begins with in each venture.
And that is precisely what YC has done here with its pro-rata program.
Founders usually have no problem with early stage investors being able to participate pro rata in later rounds as long as they are significant investors and as long as such participation does not jeopardize their ability to raise later-stage money on good terms.
YC is of course a significant investor.
As to jeopardizing future funding terms, I believe YC has made a judgment call here that the investors it typically works with will have no problem taking something less than their accustomed full pieces in the later rounds to accommodate YC and will therefore continue to finance YC ventures exactly as before. Hence, no prejudice to founders and no loss of goodwill or credibility among founders.
I believe this is a sound calculation. YC has been able to persuade VCs to deviate from a variety of their traditional rules/requirements as part of being a part of the YC universe. This is just one more to be added to the list. It is a world of increased founder leverage and that means investors who want to stay with the deal flow need to adjust and adapt. I think they will do so here as well.
In a worst case for YC, this might prove a failed experiment. But the downside of the experiment's failing is minimal while the upside in being able to avoid later-stage dilution among a vast group of potentially valuable ventures is huge. Thus, this makes eminent sense for YC for sure and probably for its founders too. As for the VCs who will have to adapt a bit, they will survive and very likely continue happily investing just as before. At least that is how I read it.
I've always thought being an LP in YC would be fantastic because of the valuation bump companies get on demo day. Let's say a company could raise money at $5mm valuation, but instead gives 7% to YC, and as a result can raise at a $10mm valuation => (1) founders win by keeping more equity, (2) YC wins by their investments getting cash with less dilution, and (3) post-YC investors pay more (maybe still great investments, but not as good as getting in at $5mm).
But to maintain 7% in companies up to a $250mm valuation, it seems that the vast majority of YC's deployed capital will be in the place of what was previous a "post-YC" investment.
YC should still be in the business of finding great companies, but might not makes sense for them to help get gangbuster valuations at demo day.
I have zero business acumen and have no familiarity with investing or how new companies work.
YC companies to date have raised $3bn in total so far, with a couple dozen above $100m out of just over 800.
Therefore at most YC would have invested $210m if they'd done this from the start.
It basically adds up to a couple hundred thousand on Series A, 0.5-0.8m series B, $1-2m at series C, then at series D you'd hope to be approaching $250m
Given a propertied fund size of $1bn this makes sense in backing winners probably funding 200 companies a year at $200-300m/year, particularly as major pickup in valuation is A to C
Of course, 7% might be enough to overcome the threshold in many cases, but as an angel investors in YC deals, I have lost my pro rata rights following a YC Note/SAFE conversion this way (despite the docs suggesting I am protected).
Once you realize that you could either stop funding companies after graduating altogether or invest in all of them, both of which remove the signal. With the funds they have, clearly there is considerable risk tolerance for the latter.
Couldnt that keep outside investors away?
"I like building things because I am curious and I pursue knowledge for its own sake"
With all the confirmation bias and name calling (which I am certainly guilty of from time to time) it is refreshing to hear someone talking about how they just want to focus on building something exciting and not focusing on politics.
this originally said "both sides to shut up to they can get back to building and hacking.", which was not meant literally, but to convey the sentiment the edited section now reflects.
edit: If you strongly disagree with me, and I am being sincere here, I can promise your energy will be much better spent building/doing/creating/enjoying something than engaging in a debate with me. If you are up to the challenge, go out and do. If you take some time to go out and do something awesome and you still feel like you would like to converse, I would like to talk about your projects/etc and my email is listed.
[final edit:] I have been doing a lot of thinking about cultural problems. I have began a change in perspective that has lead to personal growth, asking not why something matters but when/contextually something matters. Maybe whatever is being argued down thread is the single biggest issue you find fault with in our society or maybe it is the 5th, 10th issue, etc. I can only reiterate that "creating" will better your cause but this is not the context or the "when". Go start a scholarship, teach people to code, work on a product, call your senator, etc. Doing something is much better than talking about something and if there was a place to reasonably have meaningful discourse, I assure you this is not that place.
I look at the Twttier-style feminists (I don't mean the traditional equality types, but the extremists) and can only think that they are doing it for their own gain. If they really wanted to participate in their targets of anger, they could just do what everyone else does: work hard at a hobby for years, even decades, and maybe, just maybe they too could dominate the field.
This also seems like a straightforward example of how mainstream feminism is bad at intersectionality. Arguably both sides in this discussion are not great at it: I feel like there's probably a good answer that involves neither belittling people for having different reads of social interactions nor asserting that everyone else should read social interactions the way you do.
I wonder what the people in this disagreement would say today. I think tech feminism has been getting more aware of intersectionality of late, so I'm curious if the problems the author identified about have gotten better.
This article by Susan Sons is also good: http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/girls-and-software
It blows my mind that this stuff still happens. In the OSS world of all places. I can't even compute how someone can apply such "logic".
Of course, it's a lot harder to be positive rather than negative.
Now that's a woman I respect. Instead of whining around, she just implements it. Suckerpunched the misogynist.
You will see how much easier your life becomes if you stop complaining and start doing. That's also how you earn respect.
I think the last great frontier for humanity's "waking up from history" is awareness of group psychology, particularly the psychology of the "other." Ironically, as noted by GCP Grey, widespread access to the Internet has actually made such group psychology worse.
One of the big problems with an awareness of what Noam Chomsky called "irrational jingoism," is that currently society is made out of it. Our organizations and social norms and structures actually use the natural jingoism built into Homo sapiens in order to increase group solidarity.
The cognitive distortions that come out of such group psychology are a big problem online. It's been noted that if you go far enough in either direction of the political spectrum, things start to look the same. Historically, both extremes become militaristic and convinced of a duty to righteous aggression. I would invite hardy and curious souls to plumb both more militant feminist and more militant Men's Rights groups online, and witness firsthand the degree to which both sides can be eerily reminiscent of each other in tone and self-righteous attitude. (For example: Intolerant "you're with us or against us" attitudes.)
As 21st century citizens, we should already be aware of "bait and switch" tactics. We should also be savvy about the psychology of online groups, and be able to read when a group has started to cross a threshold and becomes driven by positive feedback cycles of outrage to garner more attention. We should recognize when the ideology of whatever movement has been thus hijacked to become hateivism. (EDIT: To clarify, what I refer to as "groups" are small-granularity, as in a few person's social networks, not everyone who identifies with a particular label!)
To clarify: my issue is not with either side of any debate. There are a few ideas on both sides of the issue I would agree with. My chief concern is whether the groups in question are self-aware concerning their own group dynamics. Such an organizational awareness was perhaps the chief accomplishment of Martin Luther King Jr. and his compatriots, though there seems to be no awareness of this particular accomplishment in the culture at large.
EDIT: I should clarify what I meant by saying "made such group psychology worse." Creating virtual meeting spaces and virtual online groups is far easier and far cheaper than organizing face to face groups, and the same communication resources also make it easier to facilitate such meetings in person. Much good has come of this. However, it has also created far more opportunities for the incubation of distorted mob psychologies. Often these take the name of some cause or ideology but are distorted in a jingoistic direction.
As 21st century online citizens, we should be as aware of such "bait and switch" with the labels of ideologies as we are aware of the same tactics with regards to name brands. We should be as savvy about the intellectual provenance of an online group's teachings and its actual practices as we are savvy about online shopping or choosing which Kickstarter campaigns to support. If just about anyone can set up shop online as an "activist," doesn't this create the same situation that arises when just about anyone can set up a web store? (Isn't this the same economic situation as with travelling medicine shows?)
From what I have seen online, people are often remarkably unsophisticated about evaluating distortions in their particular group's interpretation of ideologies or activist programs, and largely blind to their own group dynamics. This is especially true when "othering," stereotyping, and group hatreds have taken hold. Most importantly: It is just as true online as it is in-person.
Arguably, a slightly autistic personality is helpful for a programmer. Possibly it could also be a big reason for many future programmers to turn to tech in the first place, where you deal with strict, deterministic rules instead of emotions.
This would obviously not excuse misogyny in tech, but could help explain the gender imbalance.
The author got lucky and doesn't, or can't, feel bad about misogyny. This isn't true for everyone, nor should it be. I agree with the "feminists" that it's counterproductive to say that if more women were like you, misogyny wouldn't matter so much. Talking about "good" experiences as models is only productive when the difference between your experience and others' is the behavior of potential perpetrators, not the behavior of potential victims.
When I first entered the workplace as a programmer, I was not taken as seriously as I might have been because I was so young. I got my first programming job at 16, and even when I started doing major consulting gigs across the country at 19, I looked really young for my age. One client remarked, upon meeting me, "You don't look old enough to operate a car, much less our computer." It was always a challenge for me to get people to evaluate my ideas based on their merit rather than their source, and to evaluate me based on my work product, rather than where they were at in their career when they were my age.
I have worked for myself for many years now, but if I sought employment elsewhere, I'd probably face some difficulties because I'm much older than the average developer, and people would assume that I'm stuck in old technologies as many professional developers my age are.
But the truth is that unfounded discrimination happens all the time in the workplace, for all kinds of reasons. Almost nowhere is a true meritocracy. At one place I worked, even when I was at the perfect average age for software developers, and white, and male, even then I was cut out of the circle of the key developers. It was because the developers, owner, and key management liked to stop working many days around 10:30am and start drinking heavily, maybe stopping back by the office briefly some time in the afternoon, then go back to drinking steadily the rest of the day until 6 or 7 pm. I didn't really do that with the same kind of endless enthusiasm that they did. I didn't fit in very well.
If you find a group of people that accept you the way you are, and evaluate you based on the work you do, you've found gold. If mere excellence is the currency of the realm, and all they want from you is to be the best you can be, then that's a glorious place to be. But finding such a place is very rare. It's hard to find that in a workplace, a church, a group of friends, or anywhere. And if you're struggling to find that, it's not entirely because of race, gender, age, or sexual orientation-- it's mostly because of people's basic nature.
NB I don't have the correct language to express this idea. I'm even concerned that I might be flat out misunderstood. Consult my own comment history to know where I stand.
NB I haven't heard of the author before nor read the apparent criticism.
The author is a hardcore coder on the autism spectrum and thus fits in well with the "nobody cares about your gender, race, nor creed--show me the code!" meme.
The author asks her critics to cease putting her down to push their own agendas. Okay.
But uh... Back to that meme. Is there any chance that the author is perhaps... A coder first and a person with a gender second? That's what the meme is about, right? In text mode, we're all just text generating entities, idea makers. (It really is beautiful--I grew up on IRC myself.)
But look, the internet isn't just textmode anymore, and it doesn't exist just in cyberspace anymore. Decisions coders make affect the--blah blah you all know this, software is eating.
So, maybe, just maybe, the hardcore-on-the-spectrum-practically-deterministic-themselves folks shouldn't be the only ones with commit-bits, hm?
I'm tired of writing this. To sum up: I'm glad for the author's successful life as a coder and yes folks should stop attacking her, but no, the existence of the author nor a hundred thousand more of her does not solve the "tech needs women" problem. Because--back to the meme--it's not really women we need. It's heart.
Because software is eating the world, "Made with love" needs to more than a marketing slogan. We need more coders that are emotionally brilliant! There is a large technical debt around "how software will alter the course of human history" and frankly it terrifies me that so many emotionally stunted devs are the primary authors.
Annnnnd there go my points. ;P
Empathy is about seeing it both sides. It's not about everyone else making you feel welcome and comfortable.
* "...posted an idea for a new feature to the developers mailing list for an open-source project...[but on list she had no access to, it was] dismissed the idea out of hand because a woman had proposed it." The feature only became available because she had the opportunity to implement it in such a way that it became a "rousing success". (I should stop right here because that's about as damning an incident as I can come up with.)
* "...called the police in a foreign country to report an attempted rape at a conference, and argued with them when they told my friend that nobody would consider it assault since theyd both been drinking."
* "...thwarted a wannabe PUA at a conference completely by accident" by "a blazingly single-minded focus on whatever topic I happen to be perseverating on at the moment".
Now, I don't want to seem to be saying that she's wrong to feel as she does, or that her experiences are somehow invalid, or that she's in "denial" as some idiot put it. I'm not. Really. It works for her and others, and I think she would admit it doesn't work for everyone.
On the other hand, I don't think her suggestion of, "What Ive got, and what I wish the rest of the 'women in tech' community who rage against the misogyny they see everywhere they look could also have, is a blazingly single-minded focus on whatever topic I happen to be perseverating on at the moment," is a workable approach.
Most of the people I know can't ignore those sorts of things and can't be satisfied "...literally [doubling] over laughing at how nonplussed he must have been to see it not only implemented, but implemented to rousing success." Most of the people I know don't want to.
(Ok, here's an internet-reasoning hypothetical for you: I know a lot of geeks who use the term "sportsball"; I believe many of them have this sort of antipathy because they faced some kind of abuse from the sportsball players of the world. Would you, assuming you're one of such, be willing to ignore that abuse because you were passionately interested in baseball or (American) football---both of which have fascinating statistical stories to tell, by the way?)
Now, me, I'm a right cranky, misanthropic rat-bastard and I can certainly single-mindedly focus on whatever interests me at the moment (early Mesopotamian and Near Eastern history, abstract algebra and programming languages, and natural language processing at the moment, fwiw), but I don't want to hang around a community that is casually abusive to anyone, even if it isn't me. And, damn it, maybe I want the goddamn feature that didn't get implemented because the idea was dismissed because of who suggested it.
I notice from some of the other comments that there are those who believe that the single-minded focus is the royal road to success in tech. It's not. How many people do you know who have the focus but aren't successful? (This isn't really an example because he is successful enough that you know his name, but has anyone read Chuck Moore's blog lately?) And how many people do you know who are successful but aren't especially focused---maybe because they didn't have to swim upstream against incidents like Patterson's? (Anyone remember the old Ruby community?) Further, by the way for those of you in the startup community, you probably don't want total focus on tech to be the ultimate. People like that are very easy to take advantage of.
There isn't an above-baseline sexism among long-term professional programmers. Sure, there are bad apples, but the culture that you'll find at a gray-haired research lab or even a more traditional, supposedly conservative, enterprise shop is not nearly as exclusionary as the supposedly progressive and new Silicon Valley culture.
By stereotype, you'd expect 60-year-old men writing elevator controllers in Indiana to be far more sexist and exclusionary than 25-year-olds in California. It ain't true. First of all, someone who's 60 now was born in 1955 and has no meaningful memories of the bad old days; by the time he or she was starting a career, women were already in the workforce and it was accepted by many as a good thing. Second, if you control for education, the age vs. exclusionary behavior correlation goes away. Third, most people actually get more mature with age, and while there are some who mature at a lesser rate than society advances and become the "racist grandparent" trope, I don't think that it's the norm. (Also, American society's rate of advancement has slowed in the past 30 years compared to the 30 before that, but that's another topic.) Fourth, anyone who thinks the dominant Silicon Valley culture is still liberal has been asleep for 20 years.
That's not to say that private sector tech doesn't have a sexist, exclusionary culture. It does. It doesn't come from the programmers (although there are individual programmers who are assholes and keep it going). Rather, it comes from the mainstream business culture (MBA culture) that colonized us. In fact, the sexism of the Damasos (see: https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/vc-istan-8-t... ) who are sent West to boss nerds around is a lot more severe than that of the mainstream MBA culture. Banks might make it harder for women to advance; venture capitalists, on the other hand, will outright hit on them and threaten to "pick up a phone" and make them unfundable if they don't acquiesce.
You know how when a criminal gang kicks out some of its underperforming members and they form a new gang, the upstart young gang is typically more violent than the one it splintered off from? The sexism of the VC bros and the Spiegel types they fund is analogous. The demigods of the Valley are people who got kicked out of mainstream business culture because they weren't smart enough to do statistical arbitrage at hedge funds, so they were sent West to man this colonial outpost (from the MBA-culture perspective) called Silicon Valley. As MBA-culture failures, it's not surprising that they amplify some of that culture's worst traits, and that they've created a dominant culture in Silicon Valley that is (a) very negative and (b) far worse than the more superficially conservative (no sandals at work) but generally professional culture you see in more traditional companies, including the ones doing (say) hardware work and low-level programming, the latter of which seems to be the OP's interest.
She had a positive experience because she was hanging around Real Technologists, who aren't nearly as sexist as the Silicon Valley wunderkinder. The Shanleys of the world aren't complaining about 55-year-old men who still say "Oriental" (meaning no harm, and not holding racist views) but are generally professional and not very sexist (many are married and have daughters). They're complaining about 22-year-olds who get funded to the gills because they were in the same rape frat as a leading VC, and who go on to create horrible work cultures.
Here are a few things I learned after being closely involved with someone else's treatment. You may have heard all this already, sorry if I'm stating the obvious. But it never hurts to remember!
First: the treatments have gotten incredibly better in just a few years. The science and engineering in this field are progressing at a rate comparable to software. I also learned that age is an important factor: the younger you are, the better your body will react to chemo and transplant. And you live in the US, which has access to the best staff and equipment in the world.
Second: never forget that you can play a really important and active role in your care. Don't be passive! Do research on your own, don't hesitate to make doctors repeat themselves or explain in more detail, and approach the whole thing like teamwork: your doctors and nurses are one half of the team, and you are the other half. Yes, they know what they're doing. But nobody will be more invested in this than yourself. And remember that your state of mind has a true impact on your body.
I hope this helps... Good luck with the search and the treatment.
I'm a leukemia survivor (AML) and was diagnosed when I was 21 and in undergrad, roughly 8 years ago. I started www.cheekswab.org in 2012 to educate people, especially ethnic minorities, about the exact complications facing minorities who need bone marrow transplants. I also wanted to fill a need that I saw around direct communication around what it's like to be a donor, what the statistics are, what the process is like, and interviews with real people who have gone through the donation process recapping their experiences. I haven't done much with Cheekswab in the last several years but my new years resolution for 2015 was to figure out a path forward with it.
I live and work in NYC as a software engineer and have a lot of experience running these sorts of drives, particularly on college campuses. Feel free to reach out to me if you'd like to talk, whether about leukemia or bone marrow drives: username at gmail.
It hurt like hell for 12 hours and then I walked around Washington DC with a rucksack and gear to see our nation's capital. At the time it was a specialized process that Georgetown University was doing.
I matched again in 1998, but this time it was not a close enough match.
I cannot emphasize enough how seriously I would go back right now and do this all over again, even once a month if I had to. You're saving a life.
Statistically everyone has plenty of matches, but the problem is that your blood has to be in the registry so they can test and know. Join the registry, if not for the life you save then the wonderful happiness it will bring for helping a fellow human.
Mehrzad - friend - I do hope you find a match. I'll be thinking about you.
OP, in case you haven't thought of this already: CISA is the Columbia Iranian Students Association. They may be able to help you reach out to other Iranian friends and family. Turath is the Arab students association; that may be worth a shot too. Great Neck is right nearby, and there is literally a 100% chance that someone at CISA is from Great Neck and will be able to get the word out to the Persian community there.
You're from LA so I'm going to guess you're either from Beverly Hills or are in touch with the community there, but if not, someone at CISA will definitely be as well.
The issues you face as an ethnic minority are severe. More than 15years ago, it was an expensive and error prone nightmare to attemptdoing an international search across all (or relevant) country specificdonor databases. Hopefully things have gotten better since then.
If memory serves, there was a national marrow donor database in Iran.Hopefully, you have friends or family who know Persian well enough tohelp you find it.
If you are unable to find a donor match, you might want to consider acord blood transplant. In short, they use stem cells harvested from cordblood to rebuild your bone marrow after ablative chemo. It was a highlyexperimental treatment method more than a decade and a half ago, but itdid have a number of successes, and the state of the art in treatmenthas most definitely improved since then. Yes, my knowledge of leukemiatreatment research is badly outdated.
Is it something that is limited in quantity and once it is gone it has left your body completely? (it won't regenerate to previous levels)
Perhaps any experts can shed light here and help break any misconceptions about this.
I'd totally do this if it was laid out in a super simple way, and wasn't going to cause me significant long term harm, pain, or risk thereof.
I guess that if I'm compatible I will still be notified by the registry in the old country (or at least, my family will be notified)... and it'll only be a bit of an hassle to handle the donation, but it shouldn't be terribly urgent to resubscribe, am I right?
For maximum effect, I'd suggest making an analogue website to go along with the project because at present this initiative is limited to tech people.
I wish you the best of luck in your treatment.
Get healed and get back to the front!
The US Iranian community is big, if you have flyers or if you could create a simple one pager, I will print and drop it at 5 or 6 Persian stores around the area I live in (Orange County). There are many Persians here, you never know.
Feedback for anyone running a Donor Match site.
You would think that someone who is willing to help save lives would spend 5 minutes registering, but not always.
I went to the site and they are asking me all sorts of questions (just 4), which are COMPLETELY legit, but all I want is to give some information to say I am willing. If I match someone you can email or call me for more information, educate me and such. I may still end up being a 50/50 Yes, but at least I have shown my willingness to help.
When you ask a question such as "Do you understand all the implications, etc..." what I am supposed to think? I am thinking let me go and research the implications because I am not aware of all of them, or even 2 of them.
My own experience with other life-threatening illnesses yields the insight that if you are to survive, it is your mind that will enable you to do so. If you cannot overcome the mental challenge, no amount of medicine will help you.
A close friend once rang up the US Olympic Bicycling coach to inquire as to how he might make the team:
"Ride 120 miles every day for the next since months. Call me again after that."
1. To start with, they sneaked in the request to access all your email contacts and constantly spam them in your name which can be embarrassing at times to say the least.
2. Their mobile apps do the same with your phone contacts, cleverly hiding the checkmark (in smallest font) to disallow the uploading of contacts. I have unknowingly let them look through my contacts at least two different times prompting me to never install their app again.
3. Letting others know that you viewed their profile. This is fine as long as you know about this feature but I bet that a bunch of us were taken by surprise in the early days to find out that our "online research" on someone was not private unless if you're incognito.
4. Charging you beyond the free trial period without any email or notification about it. I agree that many businesses do this but some of them like Amazon and Netflix are nice enough to allow you to disable the future payments before the trail ends. Also they tend to notify you about the payments.
5. Letting people have access to my email and other contact info even when I haven't accepted their request to connect. This may have been fixed with the recent change but may just have been one of those hidden features that led to their popularity with the recruiter world in the first place.
I am sure I missed out a bunch of other things here but these are the reasons why I can never trust LinkedIn.
I've not looked back and my life is exactly as it was, minus a few unwanted emails.
The users are what is for sale on this site. I'm not a LinkedIn user, it's not worth it.
This has not always been the case. I used to get the hated torrent of "I see you have 12 years of development experience, how about this entry level position!!!" crap, but I haven't seen one of those in a long time. Either recruiters are getting better, or something I put in my profile has quieted down the garbage.
Either way, I don't think there's much that I've put on that site that I'd feel the need to "export" so the topic of this article seems to be a non-issue. You folks don't have alternate copies of your resume and contacts somewhere?
Yes, it has led to actual, paying jobs. It takes some management on my part, but it's a lot easier than hunting around from site to site, or going to meetups, or any of that other stuff.
Do I get spammed? Sure. That's why I have a specific email account for them. Some of the spam is quite informative. I learn about openings early on, and can often find the hiring company by taking the text of the spam and searching the various job boards.
I get genuine requests, too. I take the time to respond to those just as genuinely.
For all the talk of the importance of networking around here, I'm kind of surprised at the antipathy. It's very low effort, just a few minutes a week.
I regard a lot of the complaints as symptomatic of the overall industry. I finally started going to meetups, and the signal-to-noise is just as bad, if not worse.
as much as i may or may not like linkedin(i dont much), i think this little bit of info is useful when judging the reasoning behind the decision to turn it off.
3 days sounds an awful lot as if human intervention were required. What purpose would this serve?
There is a "download all my facebook data" option, but that only gives you a plain "firstname lastname" list. No contact information there either.
I want to be in whole control of my public data, that's why getting a domain and posting a blog is maybe more tedious but better at the end.
I can only surmise they made this change to make it harder for (more) people to bail because they know how dreadful using their site is now and this is an easier "fix" than a Dominos-style mea culpa and positive changes.
However I get lots of connection requests from recruiters. I always accept them. I figure that greatly dilutes whatever value linkedin might have once had because most of my connections are recruiters who wadte their time on me because I dont log in a whole lot.
It's been in private beta for backers for a while. I forget when it's going public, but I don't think it's far away...
Also, I'm not sure if it's a bug, but with Smart Completion set to off, it still auto completes as you are typing. This can get annoying after a while. Lastly, if you type ';' followed by enter, the program crashes.
* select table or form from a list, hit enter
* then a form with all fields would show up
* one could populate some fields with query condition, e.g. name = 'xyz'
* then hit enter and tool would run a query
* then one could navigate prev/next through the results.
I was not fond of this, but some folks in the office still swear by this and ask if they can have a tool like that for postgres. I sent them to psql, but just typing SQL gives them heartburn.
I must admit some of them were quite faster with isql than with psql. This tool helps a bit, but still hoping for the form mode.
I have a question, mostly about MySQL version of it: have you made some effort to natively support SSH port-forwarding/tsocks with this client? Because my experience is that it really works bad with the default client. But, TBH, I don't even know how much it depends on the client/server-side.
I haven't tried it yet, but I seriously need to now.
Unfortunately I'm unable to find an English-language article on that at all. There is only this Imtech response: http://imtech.com/EN/corporate/Newsroom/Highlights/Imtech-re...
Easily the best part of the article.
-a huge sport stadion
All of them as a way to transfer some state/town money to political cronies. The sad part is that some of those make sense as an infrastructure improvement (most doesn't though, at least here) so it's easier to sell the idea to people. The way the business is done is to just pay 30%-50% more than it should cost and pocket the difference.
On the plus side, it seems like they've finally found someone competent to fix the mess and move the project forward.
"Niemand hat die Absicht, einen Flughafen zu errichten!"
('Nobody has the intention to build an airport!')
It is possible that these sites exist as new financial "loopholes", transferring tax-money from the government to private contractors without much oversight.
What if you can only hand out $1M? Will someone still want to bribe you? -Of course, but he'll be a "smaller player" then.
All public spending involves some sort of "corruption"  because it's always other people's money being spent, and there's always someone in charge of spending it.
If you could pay $10 to get $100, wouldn't you do it? A bribe is an investment, and the tax money received in exchange is the ROI.
 I put "corruption" in quotes because it's just the system working as intended. If the system were actually corrupted, it would somehow start working for the masses' benefit instead.
Think about it. How do you benefit from someone else spending your money for you? Your money serves a means towards an end for whoever spends it, meaning he will be trying to benefit from spending it.
A year ago or so, it turned out that the folks responsible for all the mess (none of the board of course) we not to be found, because they were supporting a system were a subcontractor could hire another subcontractor and so forth, making it impossible for anyone to get a grip on what is going on. And that is not what I would expect from a billion dollar project run by some of the most trusted politicians and executives in our country.
I flew home from Budapest a couple of weeks ago, and I was surprised to see that we were using the actual airstrip of BER. The flight was supposed to go to SXF (Berlin Schnefeld), but instead we landed on the new airstrip, driving by the not-yet-finished new airport. Can anyone tell me why?
There's more to it though - starting with corruption  and going all the way to REBULDING the whole thing .
I'll stop here now - but I hope that there will be a lot more of critique towards those who made this a completely embarassing desaster.
[sorry guys, links are in german. I'll try to find english ones] http://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/berlin-schoenefeld-korrupt... http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/acht-milliarden-euro-b...
So, which country does Germany want to borrow money from in order to cover the wasteful spending?
I wonder if anyone has looked at large scale projects like these over the last 100 years and determined what implications (if any) technology has had in reducing these issues.
Edit: one of my favorite articles on that topic (German) http://www.der-postillon.com/2012/08/neue-zeitform-futur-iii...
According to him, you can find the famous German Grndlichkeit in The South, with The North being the exact opposite. He used the Berlin airport as an example: "it was an endless failure". This was in 2011 or 2012. I wonder how strong opinionated South-Germans like him look at this today.
I think for non-Germans the difference in Grndlichkeit is probably not noticeable :)
Then again this seems on a much higher level of disaster, but should be familiar to anyone building large government software systems.
Here is an interview with him on EconTalk about the subject:http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2015/05/bent_flyvbjerg.html
If a German airport, with a huge budget, has 150.000 defects of which 85k are serious, then what about airports in other countries, which don't make use of the world-famous german high quality standards ?
What about airports in countries were things are solved with a bribe, a handshake and an evil smile ?
My German is pretty basic, but "Geschasster BER-Planer war nur technischer Zeichner ... Doch di Mauro ist kein Ingenieur, wie angenommen wurde" amounts to "Ousted BER-Planner was only a technical draftsman ... but di Mauro is not an engineer, as was thought".
 [German] http://www.stern.de/wirtschaft/news/stern-exklusiv-geschasst...
and this: http://istderberschonfertig.de/
Because if nothing moves inside, no air circulates and they get a mold problem.
If you keep scrolling down, you hit the next article and the URL changes. How did they do that? Kudos
I wonder if it would be better to build and contract these things in stages, in blocks of usefulness.
<... and in the end Germany wins>
Amazon Full Time Employees: 154,100
Walmart Full Time Employees:2,200,000
(Based on Yahoo Finance Company Profile Stats)
There is a growing need for Human's to work Lesser Hours going forward rather than more Hours.
Amazon revenue: $89bn.
Amazon is only worth its current market cap if it can increase sales by at least 5x. Which it probably can, but it will take some years.
Wal-Mart is expanding into grocery stores, with their "Neighborhood Markets". (They mean big supermarkets, not convenience stores. Typical size is 45,000 square feet.) Wal-Mart has 40 square miles of floor space worldwide.
Their achilles heal though continues to be browsability and searching. It is obviously a great place to go if you know exactly what you want, but continues to be a poor experience if you are browsing for an item or don't know what you want. There continues to be duplicate listings for the same items (some listed by 1st party and some by 3rd party), and it is very tough to browse items. Once they actually figure this out and implement, that's when this will really become game over (at least domestically)
Not that I take it personally. Amazon went down the path to breaking trust when they came up with Prime. What does it say other than give us money so we won't charge you more. Time, gravity and a slippery slope mean that logic ultimately becomes dominant without heroic efforts of corporate culture. Sponsored ads don't create a culture to help anyone within who might be trying to fight the slide. Hell, Amazon is even in the textbook rental business screwing college students.
The problem for Amazon is that they don't have good locations locked down. Six letter .com domains aren't prime real-estate. All they have is the quality of the sales experience, and the more convoluted shopping for value becomes the better competition looks.
(from "The Everything Store" Bezzos' biography)
Amazon's Q4/2014 net income was -241,000 and they had a P/E of, well, they didn't.
I think Amazon has been one of the most innovative companies of the last decade, but Amazon is going to be a much less attractive consumer option as they start transitioning to business models that require them to actually profit.
I could steal all the lawn mowing business in town if I were willing to mow lawns for free...
While both companies have their pitfalls, it's certainly interesting to continue to watch e-commerce's rise.
Either a glimpse of a bubble in making or tech truly is the new oil.
It always bothers me that this area of the law seems to be entirely based on judges' interpretation of the purpose of a UI. A UI is illegal if it guides the user towards the illegal action. If it is possible to perform the illegal action but the user has to put in a little thought into how to accomplish it then the UI is legal. Google can't have a file-type search box with an mp3 option but if users know the right incantation they can achieve the same thing. So we have lawyers telling us how we can build UIs. It seems wrong and like a dangerous slippery slope.
This business seems to have been run and have proceeded horribly, for the exact reasons that Caldwell and everyone else with experience in that area seems to be extremely familiar with.
Is there anything legitimately interesting to the "Apple" and "Steve Jobs" parts of this story other than the usual clickbait?
The reason why they failed is because they, like many others, were "nebulously/quasi legal." (You know what was ALSO awesome yet not legal or respectful of creator pay? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audiogalaxy .) At least Apple was trying to make it all legit. They did start with DRM (note: no longer the case for years) but this was to make the record companies more comfortable with it.
The reason why SeeqPod was sued is because Warner Music (and others) had a case. It was not a purely frivolous, harassing lawsuit.
How does one "debug" X11 config files? I had to do that when it hated my monitor and rubbish graphics card but that sentence appears like complete and utter rubbish.
EDIT: For clarification for those disposed to downvote, looking through an XF86 config file is not rocket science.
A bizarre comment did he expect to see it coming? How does this relate to the story at hand? "Somehow, even someone as sophisticated as me, didn't see the downturn coming" ... if he could predict any kind of change in the stock industry better than investing professionals he wouldn't be running a questionably-legal streaming startup.
Citation needed. Or did I miss it amongst the self-aggrandizing?
People on the web today are not really anonymous and not really identifiable either. I think we need to fix both of those problems.
Have you been paying attention at all the past 10+ years? Please explain they success they have had and how it came from their courtroom escapades.
The willingness of police to label death a suicide never ceases to amaze me. I was on the beach down in Florida a few years ago and found a dead girl with her hands tied. Cops showed up and immediately assumed suicide. Turns out she had drug issues and had a history to support the assumption, but no reasonable person would approach a situation like that with such strong priors.
I'm not saying every crime scene is out of a Hollywood movie with a serial killer lurking in the shadows, but I would have really liked to see zero prior beliefs at that point. I'd sleep better knowing the people out there in charge of "serving and protecting" the general public viewed their occupation as a search for truth rather than some perverse version of The Office with guns.
This one... is apparently not? What's going on here?
1)Repeated unimportant segments of video.
2)A fairly good sounding audio track.
3)An audio track which is not the same length of the video track.
4)The video issues do not start happening till over 20 minutes into the uploaded video, and then happen at multiple times over the next 15 minutes.
What can we conclude about the video? Well I can't conclude anything, but I sure get a lot of questions.
Could this be an issue with the recording of the video stream? I don't know seems like we might have some experts here on video recording equipment here that might be able to say if this is a type of problem that is even possible, maybe even some with knowledge of the type of equipment used in police dash cams.
Has anyone seen anything like this 'just happen' in digital video before? I haven't but my experience is limited. Anyone else?
Why is the audio OK but the video is bad? Well audio and video could be recorded separately, and if they weren't they are not hard to separate, and audio is much easier to edit.
Could the video of been edited? Well sure it was probably at least cut for upload. If it was edited the editor really sucked.
If the video was edited, why would the video be edited? Maybe it was cut to remove something that happened in one of the frames somewhere during one of the repeats. Maybe the audio was edited too and it was edited to more closely match the audio length (matching just as well as the video was edited). Maybe someone started editing the video to hide something in a missing segment and didn't finish or get to the audio before it was uploaded.
What other things besides editing and recording failure could explain the video issue? I don't know.
Do we have any experts here who given the available youtube video on the Texas Department of Public Safetys youtube page could do analysis on a more in depth level than watching it? I don't know but I think this question is why I see this belonging on Hacker News.
At 12:50 the policeman slams shut the door of her car and it is in sync with the audio.
At 25:55 the same door gots slammed, but no sound is to be heard. Maybe because the policeman is carrying the microphone? Is he that far away?
At about 48:00 the door of another car gets slammed. Its clearly on the audio, but about 1 second too early.
What this is, is an ultra-common case of yet another cop "escalating everything always" because there is no downside for them to do so. They do it because they can, because they are taught power and control over people is everything and the slightest challenge should be met with extreme force.
She should have never have been ordered to get out of the car, so this was a false arrest.
If it's an order, get out of the car. White, black, asian, or hispanic, once that order is given, you're getting out of the car one way or another.
If you really think the order was given unlawfully, take it to court where these things can be debated.
Cops have stopped pulling me over for no reason. Before the cam, I was getting pulled over for driving an old car, or I was driving between 10 p.m. - 2:30 a.m.? I wish I had these cams when I was younger. Could have saved a lot of pointless questions, and aggravation?
I'm a white guy who's been pulled over so many times for no reason--I lost count; I can't imagine what minorites have to go through? We should be able to drive without that constant fear of harassment. Harrasement is being pulled over for made up reasons? Cams have helped in my world. They have worked so well, I thinking about mounting a rear cam? "See them coming and going?" Sorry, if I sound jaded, but I live in a low crime area. Cops have become revenue collects here.
I have no clue if the cop was right when he said that he has "every right" to ask her to put down her cigarette and step out of her car. Cops pull this shit all the time betting on the fact that citizens have no f-ing idea what they actually can and can't order them to do.
"I will light you up!", just for that this guy deserves to be fired.
If true, oddly enough, I'm not sure a crime was committed, although it sure feels like somebody should go to jail. But I am not sure. Is there a law that says that everything the police releases to the media concerning possible court cases must be the same evidence that will be presented at trial? Or are they free to spin and edit things however they like? I believe they are.
Assuming this line of reasoning, the LAT may have jumped the gun by releasing the story when it did. It would have been much more interesting to have let the video stand as a Press Release, then see if they tried to use it in court, then run the story. As it is now, we'll never know how that scenario would have turned out.
The killer app in this space will be when someone figures out how to extract a vocal model from existing recordings of singers. Vocaloid already synthesizes singing quite well, but a human singer has to go into a studio and sing a long list of standard phrases to build the singer model. The next step will be to feed existing singing into a system that extracts a model usable for synthesis.
The RIAA is so going to hate this.
The input was copied from the instructions - "Type a message into the text box, and the network will try to write it out longhand". But you can see it skipped the "e" in "Type" and added an "h" after the "w" in "network", and pretty clearly spelled "to" as "du".
It also tried to cross the first vertical line of the "w" in "network" in lieu of adding an actual "t" beforehand (which is arguably an idiosyncrasy a human's handwriting might have, if a rather odd one); and stuck a big phantom stroke/letter between "T" and "y".
And so begins the devaluing of that proof. Just like when marketers started reproducing the "signature" on every sales letter with blue-colored toner, mimicking the authenticity of a hand signature.
I don't write handwritten letters, and I don't romanticize the past. But our dwindling ability to assess the authenticity of incoming communication is slightly unsettling.
Text entered: this is a test of handwriting generation
Style sample #1 selected.
All other settings at default.
Edit: I've tried a couple other styles and haven't duplicated this craziness.
I could see it being used in games to generate hand written notes from data files.
I love what BREAKFAST does as much as the next person and they are an extremely talented team, but all of this amazing technology and innovation is going towards selling products for a brand that totally disregards factory workers wage rights so much so that F21 were "sued by the United States Department of Labor for ignoring a subpoena requesting information on how much the companys suppliers pays the workers who make its clothes"
This reminds me of the recent article posted on HN "Web Design: The First 100 Years". How many of these underpaid factory workers are the greatest minds of our time? "We live in a world now where not millions but billions of people work in rice fields, textile factories, where children grow up in appalling poverty. Of those billions, how many are the greatest minds of our time? How many deserve better than they get? What if instead of dreaming about changing the world with tomorrow's technology, we used today's technology and let the world change us? Why do we need to obsess on artificial intelligence, when we're wasting so much natural intelligence?"
"Then the gas-lights guttered in their copper rings, and the orchestra swung into a flat rendition of 'Come to the Bower.' With a huff, the limelight flared, the curtain drew back before the kinotrope screen, the music covering the clicking of kinobits spinning themselves into place."
Either way, this is really cool! I'd love to work on something like this as a job :)
Threads are 1 dimensional; bands are 2 dimensional.
I guess the spool belts have run out of alignment? I would have guessed they'd have implemented closed-loop positioning for the colour-belt, but it appears not to be the case.
It looks like you followed the basic design of a Van de Graaf generator, so I imagine you had a very difficult time with static eletricity.
How did you handle alignment of the colors? Maybe a gray code and optical sensor on the back side of the bands?
One video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHf2sezptLU
Still, I submitted a picture of Ada Lovelace.
Kudos to the marketing department for giving BREAKFAST (WHY IS IT IN ALL CAPS?) employees a super fun job for a year and a half, but holy cow, this is a huge waste of time and money. They could have gotten more out of Facebook ads.
The real fix will require much more intervention than just a firmware flash at the garage.
We'll see at Def Con how much Chrysler really screwed up.
I don't think that's the case, but I still commend them for doing a recall this quick.
Shooting the messenger seems to still be quite a strong reflex for corporations faced with bad news. The way to look at it should be that these guys did Fiat-Chrysler a service. After all, it's not only security researchers that have the ability to write code and that have prolonged access to a vehicle to test.
They seem to be mistaken about the time to write the code, after all, you can write the code and test it on a different vehicle than the one you intend to crash.
Law enforcement typically won't analyze the firmware of all the computers in a car after a single vehicle accident (and it would probably be quite possible to erase the evidence once the car has been given a command sufficient to kill the occupants).
We're all used to the idea that if you put a computer on the internet, it will come under attack. People will try to snoop on the data it handles, or subvert it to use it for their own purposes. So why do we then move on to assume that, if such a system is attached to something safety critical, that those same people who will attack the computer to get at its data or processing power will now move on to attacking the brakes, or the engine, and try to kill people?
Most vehicular crime isn't homicide, it's acquisitive - people will attack vehicle security systems to steal the car, or get access to valuable contents. Sabotaging the vehicle to kill the driver is way down the list.
As a society we tend to assume that physical security is not the only thing that stops random strangers from trying to kill us. We do not all drive around in armored cars in case someone decides to shoot at us from an overpass. We don't all sweep under our car with a mirror for bombs before we get in and start the engine.
And it's certainly not a failing of Chrysler's engineers to adequately consider customer safety that they sell Jeeps which are not bulletproof and which have exposed frameworks on the underside where bombs can be attached.
So why is it that we're so quick to assume that because a safety-critical computer system is exposed to the internet, that this is the worst thing ever?
Is it that as far as physical security of your Jeep goes you only have to trust the people in your neighborhood, but for internet security we have to trust the whole world?
I know this is supposed to be The Magic Kingdom where people are only supposed to say positive things and eat happy pills all day, but would it kill people to at least try to read up about the things they so willingly share their "insights" on before posting here?
At the very least, try to understand how CAN works before spouting nonsense grounded in uninformed assumption. Uninformed opinions are not helpful. They just pollute the discussion.
If a compromised device can talk on the CAN bus it's game over since (pretty much) everything listens on that bus so you can't (without a lot of time and effort, implement a way to) pick and choose systems to segregate while maintaining wireless connectivity to those critical system.
Vehicle manufactures get a huge data set sent back to them by vehicles. They use this for stuff like correlating part failures to operational conditions, determining which intermittent wiper setting people use as well as improving the logic for the operation of critical systems (e.g. if my last inputs were $stuff then don't upshift). I wouldn't be surprised if they sold the data as well. McDonalds would love to know where and when people start looking for food. insurance companies would love to have more variables to correlate to risk trivial (e.g. $color cars with $trivial_feature get in accident that cost $really_small_percent $more_or_less than $other_color
To segregate systems you need to be able to pitch to the bean-counters that the cost/benefit of whatever degree of segregation you're proposing beats the cost/benefit of whatever plan the next guy is proposing. These data sets are incredibly valuable to many different parts of the company. The people doing marketing and customer facing stuff would be at a severe competitive disadvantage if they had to wait months (first oil change) o get real world data on feature usage after a re-design.
Sure you could download it at service time..."but we already have a system that does it in near real time, can't we just secure that?"...
TL;DR: Segregating systems involves more than having the engineers wait a few months to figure out if their new tune solved the problem.
"No defect has been found. FCA US is conducting this campaign out of an abundance of caution."
What the hell?
The WIRED story's hackers presumably were authorized by the vehicle's owner or operator, so the demo did not "constitute criminal action."
Maybe IIHS needs to include "remote hackability" as a criterion in their testing?
because nothing screams quality like a 'decided to leave one day after yet another drop in Consumer Report rankings' and 1.4m car recall!
screw that attitude.
I hope government will make the equivalent of whistleblower protection for security researchers that report exploitable flaws, because it's the only way to increase security over time.
i.e. I'm scared as hell that planes are allegedly hackable but researchers aren't really talking about it nor testing it properly because fear of lawsuits.
I know I'll get down voted, but it has to be asked.
Ever the enduring question
I have zero sympathy for the manufacturers. I only hope that, if they decide to go on a witch hunt, they actually seek and punish the morons in power who, most likely for self-serving purposes, let this slide.
This also should raise a ringing cry to rein in DMCA et al. uses that seek to outlaw such research. In this case, the manufacturer has obviated their authority in the matter.
> A word on procedure: In this section, we've smoothly moved from single hidden-layer shallow networks to many-layer convolutional networks. It's all seemed so easy! We make a change and, for the most part, we get an improvement. If you start experimenting, I can guarantee things won't always be so smooth. The reason is that I've presented a cleaned-up narrative, omitting many experiments - including many failed experiments. This cleaned-up narrative will hopefully help you get clear on the basic ideas. But it also runs the risk of conveying an incomplete impression. Getting a good, working network can involve a lot of trial and error, and occasional frustration. In practice, you should expect to engage in quite a bit of experimentation.
There is a lot of "magical thinking" amongst people not actively doing research in the area (and maybe a bit within that community too), and I think it at least partly stems from mainly seeing very successful nets, and never seeing the many failed ideas before those network structures and hyperparameters were hit upon - a sampling bias type thing, where you only read about the things that work.
16 days ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9863832
8 months ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8719371
a year ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8258652
a year ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8120670
a year ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7920183
a year ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7588158
two years ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794308
Out of curiosity, do many implementations of convolutional neural networks take advantage of FFT, DCT, or some other fast orthonormal transform to compute the transition between layers, or are the kernel sizes small enough that there isn't a great advantage to that?
my reading for today, thanks for sharing!
Just install our browser plugin, go to a netflix vid, hit "watch in AltspaceVR", and you'll have a virtual space dedicated for that netflix movie.
It's a really neat idea, and it's basically second-best to watching a video in the same room as someone else. It's really fun to watch shows with other people, have discussions about the show, and share the experience.
References (I didn't make these):
I have video chat, a synced shared web browser, and support for Netflix & Hulu.
If anyone is interested: https://www.distanceflix.com
Did you start after Netflix switched to HTML5 video? I'm curious how you might've dealt with the old flash player- I basically gave up on any actual control of Netflix in my side project because it was too black-boxy.
Check the screenshot: http://i.pics.rs/64I0n
Maybe I will open source it when it's done. Btw I used Qt and libVLC.
Here's the source (https://github.com/kristopolous/emptyv) ... most of it was written during the 3 or so weeks that it had lots of traffic, coming from all places, Poland.
I worked hard on the anarchistic anonymous vj feature as a social experiment. It was interesting but not traction building.
One day I'll build something that can sustain traffic. One day...
Zeebox/Beamly also had/have some good social features but I think they even struggled for people to actually use it. After the initial curiosity people just want to veg in front of the box. I think. http://beamly.com
One of you starts watching a movie, the others start watching the same movie and it asks them "would you like to resume from X". Just say Yes and you're all watching the movie in sync.
I love that you can do this with Netflix now though, this seems like one if those features that could have (was?) In the original release.
Just using netflix is definitly suitable for the masses too :)
Instead of commercial breaks they could have intermissions like old movie theaters allowing people to smoke and chat.
it works for YouTube and local files.
I was disappointed of how aggressive the libav guys where during the fork. They changed the content of ffmpeg.org (which they had legitimate access to) to claim that libav was now the new name of the project. Then they replaced the ffmpeg package in Debian with their own version.
It's entirely possible to maintain both packages in Debian with the alternatives framework. This whole false dichotomy and calling ffmpeg the fork is not helpful in my opinion. So I'm glad that ffmpeg is getting it's package back. Forks are good and should stand on their own merit instead of doing politics like that.
I tried this criteria, I divide the committers in three groups:
A) Michael Niedermayer
B) People with more commits in FFmpeg, i.e. Clment Bsch, James AlmerCarl, Eugen Hoyos, ...
C) People with more commits in libav, i.e. Vittorio Giovara, Martin Storsj, Anton Khirnov, ...
(I supouse there are other commits from people outside the published table, but they are few.)
libav FFmpeg A) 46 1831 B) 37 1071 C) 1074 856 Tot: 1157 3758
Developer libav FFmpeg --------------------------------- Michael Niedermayer 46 1831 --------------------------------- Clment Bsch 179 James Almer 155 Carl Eugen Hoyos 150 Andreas Cadhalpun 21 114 Lukasz Marek 98 Paul B Mahol 93 Ronald S. Bultje 85 wm4 16 83 Christophe Gisquet 66 Benoit Fouet 48 >>>Subtotal 37 1071 --------------------------------- Vittorio Giovara 294 294 Martin Storsj 253 252 Anton Khirnov 206 197 Luca Barbato 131 113 Diego Biurrun 72 Rmi Denis-Courmont 32 Hendrik Leppkes 17 Himangi Saraogi 16 Gabriel Dume 16 Federico Tomassetti 14 Peter Meerwald 12 Janne Grunau 11 >>>Subtotal 1074 856 ------------------------------------ >>>>>>Total 1157 3758
I can't comment on code quality, project management, etc and frankly I don't care. If one library causes problems to every bit of my system, it should stay off until it is on par with the library it tries to replace provided that both libraries use a free software compatible license.
This kind of behavior is lethal to open source projects, end users will end up fragmented across the two versions, package maintainers for the various distros have to make tough choices and everybody loses.
Forking a project should be reserved for when a project becomes - by some objective criteria - abandoned and there is enough support for the project to continue. Then and only then should a project with a large amount of traction be forked.
Forks are both the greatest thing in the open source world and the most annoying thing at the same time, they have the potential to rescue projects but more often than not they're used to kill projects.
Really happy to see ffmpeg back, and I hope that the people that the majority of the contributors to libav switches to directly contribute to ffmpeg so that there will be an end to all the duplicated effort and wasted resources.
This is weird to hear as a consumer of these libraries. When people ask why I prefer one or the other for my own use cases, I tell them that FFmpeg has the better API and the better format support (specifically vastly more pixel formats/depths in its lossless codecs). But regarding API, at least the parts that concern me, FFmpeg is a bit fuller and requires less boilerplate. libav* have a large surface area, so even minor affordances like avformat_alloc_output_context2 and avcodec_find_best_pix_fmt_of_list are helpful.
To be fair to Libav, due to being "downstream" FFmpeg has benefited greatly from their improvements, e.g. AVBuffer and the redone AVFrame management on top of it. They absolutely deserve credit for improving the API. But FFmpeg's API being effectively a superset of Libav, as a plain old user of the libraries it doesn't really make sense to target the latter.
That's to say nothing about the politics or people involved in the projects, it's just a matter of practicality.
The great thing about open source is that even if they step away it's not like the code is going anywhere. To an end user of ffmpeg it would still continue to function.
I personally had no idea ffmpeg was forked to libav until one day I tried to install it in Ubuntu and was like...wtf. Then I installed libav and went about my day.
ffmpeg has maintained compatibility, making it really easy for downstream users and distro maintainers to keep going, whilst continuously adding new features and improvements, including aggressively merging those placed in libav (I guess as long as they aren't deletions or cleanups?).
I feel like there's a lot to learn in this whole drama and that it hasn't been very deeply explored. libav team originally claimed that ffmpeg's leadership had gone dark/fallen off the map, but they sure came back quickly to express discontentment at the mutiny. libav team undoubtedly has talented people working on it (wasn't DarkShikari on the libav side of the schism?) and libav/ffmpeg share a lot of goals. You'd think they could come to some type of compromise less onerous than this entire saga has been. IMO it's a failure from all sides that this fork was even a thing. A phased, unified, slow, and well-managed release process like Python 2 -> Python 3 might have made all of this unnecessary.
TLDR; there is a sharing program which installs web service on localhost:4001 that handles sort of magnet links
If DMCA claims were expensive, companies would bother requesting takedown for the most profitable movies/albums/games only and they wouldn't go on autopilot, claiming whatever they think might infringe their copyrights. But then the garage bands and individual artists/musicians would be left out of the game completely, they couldn't use DMCA to take down their music.
On the other hand, how do you prove you are the author unless you have lots of money for lawyers? If you say "I composed this song at home, and published it under CC licensing" and MAFIAA say they represent the copyright holder, is it not clear who owns what?
If there was a digital notary service where you could digitally sign and timestamp a file, that might help a bit. But the downside is that people could take public domain works or someone's un-notarized works, claim ownership, have it stamped and they would begin to hold a stronger position pretending to be the author.
I think this is somehow similar to how indigenous people wondered how the white man could possibly think of owning forests, rivers, and land. They considered Earth unownable, not belonging to anyone but rather people belonging to the Earth. Similarly, natives to the digital world wonder how somebody could possibly think of owning bits, numbers, and copyable files.
Now that's not so funny.
I stopped pirating music since Spotify came along - the price is right and the selection is good enough to keep me engaged for several lifetimes.There is no such thing for movies.
Maybe iTunes, but I'm not willing to pay their price and the selection is far from complete.
So instead of paying lawers and acting like clowns, these guys should invest in a startup which is the Spotify for movies without all the jurisdictional limitations that usually come with such services, because their lawyers are busy fishing pirates on 127.0.0.1...
EDIT: Also, Universal's been doing it LOTS of times before too (via above link).
The lawyer sending these automated DMCA searches tagged their own computer, implying they were pirating the movie.
That's hilarious if it's true.
It has one pitfall which consistently stops me from using it though : poor support with newer releases of Rails, usually due to the Active Record stack not working well with the AR JDBC adapter.
I know some work was being done on a JRuby version of the standard pg gem (without the need for JDBC) which would be fantastic if it was completed and working.
Stumbling over a serious race condition in the first 5 minutes of trying it with real code makes me a bit wary. All the performance in the world isn't much good if it's randomly wrong :/
Did they achieved this via JNI?
I'm very happy to see JRuby 9000 and hope we'll upgrade soon.
Write ES5 and time how long it takes you to complete projects of a given size.
Write reactjs code but use the JSXTransformer. Watch page performance. Watch how many times you reload the page in a given sitting.
It's really only when you find yourself with a problem that you can quantify that these tools start to make sense.
Discover for yourself why these tools exist or you'll waste a ton of time learning the newest thing and in the end not have gained much at all.
No. By far the biggest weakness of such a small tools approach is a Balkanization of development tools that generally refuse to work with one another and often don't work very well by themselves. One library I really wanted to try was using Browserify but I wanted to use brunch/bower because my workflow was already in brunch. Even with the brunch-browserify plugin this wasn't possible. After wasting two days on it, I gave up and just used Browserify by itself. Another couple of hours it was actually working. This is typical. On another app, I use gulp. Another piece of garbage that claims that when you run a command 'gulp watch' it will automatically rebuild your assets. It won't.
These are only three small projects, each using a different build tool: browserify, gulp, and brunch + bower. None of them are compatible with each other and it's unlikely they will ever work together in one project without hours or days of trial and error. If there was one monolithic (or not) dependency / build tool that actually worked, I'd much rather use that, and it would be a much better approach than having a whole bunch of small crappy tools that don't work together.
tl;dr: Not only is having multiple tools doing the same thing in this area not appealing, it just leads to developers wasting massive amounts of time and "what the fucks?" working with half a dozen tools that do the same thing and do it poorly.
Maybe few new players have appeared (Gulp, WebPack, Babeljs) but they do exactly the same thing that the tools we had before (e.g. Grunt, Browserify, Traceur).
I would like to have some decent tools for:
* analysing of project structure (e.g. dependencies between modules, graphs, trees etc.)
* code visualising (not toy! Gource is beautiful, but pretty useless. JSCity... I also don't see much use of it. I would see something that would allow me to draw some useful information from code visualisation. Something that would allow to understand better. But I see only beautiful animations and abstract 3D scenes)
* maintaining code (something that would allow me to conduct massive scale refactoring, or automatically convert code from one framework to another etc.)
* better editors for HTML/CSS, maybe even some decent WYSIWYG
Okay. Plain build systems and transpilers also are super useful. I think that Gulp, Babel.js, Browserify etc. are greeeat. But I think we need more. Something different. There is still room for innovation. Projects grow bigger and I think that we need something that helps us
* to understand easily new codebase
* to navigate codebase, conduct semantic search etc.
* to maintaining, refactoring etc.
I feel that some important tools are missing, not created yet.
I'm starting to see people talking more about webpack than the former...
I created a react/grunt/browserify/babelify (+bootstrap) starter repo to clone from github for them but think it's still confusing. This provides much needed background information in one bundled place (even though the stack is slightly different and only mentions grunt).
And i got to check AWS again and i am pleasantly surprised things have improved dramatically!
Anyone has numbers for Google?
If Amazon were to stop and start making a profit, wouldn't they immediately be undercut by the next generation of quasi-ponzi companies who are now willing to sacrifice short term profits?
Might be able to get more clarity into what they are paying for these undisclosed acquisitions prices, assuming their cost for constructing data farms stays relatively constant.
- Peritor (Ops, Mar 2013)
- ClusterK (Apr 2014, $20M-$50M)
- Amiato (NoSQL, May 2014)
- 2lemetry (IoT, Mar 2014)
- Annapurna Labs (Jan 2015, ~$370M)
- AppThwack (Mobile testing, Jul 2015)
The reference implementation is based on Ubuntu Touch, and use libhybris to get hw support. However, it's different from UT, by the fact that it's not using Mir, but Wayland directly through Kwin.
It seems to run Ubuntu Touch applications, X11 applications, KDE/QML ones and Jolla/Sailfish/Nemo ones. They seem to have Android apps on the roadmap too.
Except the drivers (through libhybris), everything is open source and numerous KDE/QML apps can run without modifications. It can also run without libhybris if you have kernel DRM.
The distribution is based on Kubuntu, and so far it works only on the Nexus 5.
I for one am really excited about this. I wrote about why on reddit.
Keep up the good work devs!
Have you been thinking about the hardware problem in the long run? Jolla has apparently decided to leave the hardware business; I'm not sure where open-source mobile developers will get (guaranteed) hardware for their systems in the future.
For example, I can't read any of the text on the phone image on the front page, and physically the image on my screen is bigger than my iPhone. So the text is unreadable in the OS by default?
No reason for the crowd here to be so cynical, clearly they do have designers. For those holding the Apple flag, just compare the UI differences from Pixelmator and Mail.App to see there are many inconsistencies and that is fine, because different apps do different things.
Looking forward to seeing how this will work out! A replacement for Android is much appreciated.
"Plasma Phone OS (or simply Plasma Phone) is a complete software stack for mobile devices and includes the following libre technologies:
Plasma Mobile (a Plasma-based shell), KWIN/KWayland, Voicecall, Ofono, RIL, OHM, Telepathy"
Aside from Voicecall, I have no idea what these are or why they would be desirable in a phone.
- Add narration
- Keep the video under 3 minutes
- Use an attractive pair of hands in the demo
- Stick to high level features
The most important suggestion is adding narration. I had no clue why I was being shown some of these apps.
As an aside, KRunner is the best, most powerful and useful launcher I have ever used.
But still gl and keep hacking.
Some history, Plasma Active is about five years old now and its development coincided with a would-have-been-crowdfunded-toay tablet called Vivaldi that was supposed to be an open hardware device that never panned out because costs got out of control and interest waned.
It was based on Mer, rather than Kubuntu, and Qt4 rather than 5. Today it looks like a colossal wreck, and all the "Active" app UIs developed for it are all complete wastes of code and time today because QML was not mature enough when they made that "first attempt". Today there are common themed QML elements called the qt-quick-controls that everyone can use to build UIs that adapt to every devices native toolkit, while still supporting animations and flow elements and all the nice graphical perks hardware accelerated UIs allow.
Its been basically dead in the water for over two years, since the tablet project went belly up, and there even used to be a "Kubuntu-active" fork of Kubuntu that the project was maintaining as a way to try out the Plasma Active desktop on top of a Kubuntu core. The shell from Plasma Active did eventually see use in its adoption as the "netbook" interface found in Plasma 4 near the end of its lifecycle.
So you definitely want some post-mortum on the last KDE mobile attempt and you also want to consider how Plasma Mobile might succeed or fail in a similar vein.
Why did Plasma Active basically never do anything? Number one, no device support. It was not targeting phones at the time, and was instead looking towards tablets, but it never even ran properly on a Nexus 7 and those only turned up while it was on the decline. Without hardware, software is useless. This time around Plasma Mobile is shipping for the Nexus 5 out of the gate, a significant improvement. If they can make images for popular dev phones for a while, they will certainly have more potential devs than Active ever did, which pretty much amounted to building and running the shell in a child Kwin to tinker with, but never use on an actual device.
Number two, its UI was a wreck. This was before the KDE VDG, Breeze, and Material Design were a thing, so Plasma Active was built on ugly Oxygen and Active Apps were made with effectively prototype QML1 where you had to write your own button class. As a result, all the apps not made for Active (and most weren't, since it was dead in the water) were their desktop versions and unusable on small touch screens, and all the Active apps looked like you drew some rectangles on a white background you could click because that is literally how you made buttons in QML1.
Plasma Mobile does improve on this as well. Breeze, the new KDE theme, beats the pants out of their older defaults. They now have a KDE font, and a KDE icon theme meant to encompass everything, that are all consistent. they now have their visual design group making mockups and directing design for new apps and old, though there is an obvious schism between designers making mockups and anyone actually implementing them - there is an amazing Muon design that was never implemented into the final product which looks and feels like butt. And not a single core KDE app in the KDE Software releases is shipping a QML2 powered UI that is meant for mobile that uses a common design language like Material. It means all the core KDE apps - Kontact, Dolphin, whatever web browser you want to use (Rekonq is dead, Konqeror is a zombie, and there are several new projects out there - for mobile, you might be able to get away with a dumb qtwebengine wrapper), Amarok (which also has another amazing VDG UI floating around that is still unimplemented), Dragon Player, etc. They all need mobile UIs, none of them have them now, and you wouldn't even want to make a mobile UI, you would want to make adaptive UIs - you would want all these programs to be able to scale from phone size to desktop size and readjust their layouts accordingly, because that is what QML2 is really good at. Its also a complexity nightmare, if anyone has tried a responsive website, albeit QML2 does so much of a better job equipping you with the tools to do that its almost not comparable.
Lastly, Plasma Active never had an app store. At all. Muon was still in its infancy back then, so you were using... Apper. Which is basically a worse Synaptic package manager, and Synaptic does not belong in the same room as a mobile phone UI. The newer appstream infrastructure and the future xdg-app tech should be great when it lands, but like I said before Muon is still a mess, though maybe that responsive adaptive UI redesign will also bring the VDG designs to the forefront finally and make it really great.
But Plasma Mobile supporting Ubuntu Touch Apps, Sailfish Apps, Firefox OS HTML5 apps, and Android apps with slashtik will definitely solve the app problem. Security might become a problem, then, though. You are now mixing debs, click packages, apks, app manifests, and RPMs from Sailfish on one system. Sounds like a giant mess. So do you just containerize everything? Good luck with that limited mobile phone storage and memory size. How does apparmor integrate with that mess? How about how Muon integrates knewstuff content from kdelook and kdeapps - those are literally just zipfiles it extracts into predetermined locations.
A lot of questions, but as long as they don't go over their heads and stay within their manpower - which if Active is any indication is that you really just need a core base working great before trying to take over the world - it should have much more potential than the last KDE foray into mobile.
The dream, of course, is that Sailfish / Ubuntu Touch / Firefox OS all eventually rebase off Plasma Mobile and just provide their own UI shells over it, so that all the major open source mobile players are working in one ecosystem rather than working in their own trees at their own companies not trying to play ball with the competition. Good luck with that one.