jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Just because they may not do it today, doesn't mean they won't tomorrow.

And just because there is no reliable evidence of systematic wrong-doings to further political agendas yet (re: the new surveillance machinery, of course), it doesn't mean it hasn't been done already. E.g. if you successfully blackmail people with data you gained from your surveillance system, it is unlikely the blackmailed person will speak up immediately or even later.

There already is plenty of evidence that the surveillance system was abused, although maybe not by the state itself, or at least not for nefarious purposes.

Think of NSA employees (not just one or two) spying on various people "for personal use", mostly love interests:
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-someti...

Even before that, Echelon was abused to spy on (allied) nation states to gain economic advantages:
http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/6/6662/1.html
... and to spy on Princess Diana for whatever reason:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/dec98/di...
(and being a German myself, the Merkel phone story made some huge waves over here)

US citizens are also affected, like the woman who researched pressure cookers online shortly before the Boston attack:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/new-york-police...
(Given the current MO of many LEA in the US, I wouldn't have been surprised if they showed up with a SWAT team instead, at least demolishing the door and shooting their dog, if any)

Then there is that Parallel Construction mess to hide the fact that evidence was first obtained using illegal, warrant-less eavesdropping:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

I'll stop listing examples of abuse and overreach now, but there are plenty more, of course.
I'm trying to understand here: Aren't Google's Public Resolvers authoritative for the domain names Google itself owns?
damn i should not have told them my info in exchange for them crappy free batteries!

(I remember going to the shack with dad as a kid. His favorite thing there were the free batteries. Just by showing up you could get a free 9v battery. What a great place!)
$1.50 a meal? In what country?

Where are you buying your protein for $3 per pound? Ground beef costs more. 100g before cooking is a pretty small serving.

My local Safeway wanted $7/dozen (!!) for store brand eggs last week. I walked away shaking my head. Dollar isn't what it used to be. This week it was a "more reasonable" 5.49.
And lets not forget the previous sentence:

"But a few months later, Mr. Conway ignited another drama when he quietly negotiated what some investors considered to be a sweetheart deal."

You should write to the WSJ that anyone that wants the same "sweetheart deal" can easily get it, by simply emailing the same offer to all the Y-combinator startups and putting up the cash. I think these guys are just way too used to Wall Street, where everything is closed doors negotiations, $800/hr attorneys and secret deals. They just assumed that some type of sweetheart deal must have been involved.
Could you possibly give a brief pseudocode example that shows how this progression of functional to oo you're referring to works?
The number of people who will find an attack in the middle of a ton of Javascript is much smaller than the number of people who properly handle a certificate warning.
That doesn't work, Dropbox/your favourite TLA will just wait for you to supply the password and then save the key. Trading off the inconveniences of good crypto (e.g. no web interface) for that little security isn't worth it.
I'm sure the author has a reason.

I can't help but think that reason is the author is incredibly preoccupied with food.
Economic, pollution data is similarly manipulated. Local officials have incentives to misreport this data.

Why should infection data be any different?

The current CCP narrative is that all new cases are imported. Do you find this credible?
The server is needed for serving responses to api calls when the user navigates pages.
If you don't have server, you won't be able to have a SPA, but just a static generated website.
Do you know what the differences end up being when it comes to compilation? (not a rhetorical question - I'd like to know)
This is really cool but I am not sure it helps a person devising a plan towards the solution. It's more of an exploratory stumble-upon-solution activity.
From GP's post I surmised that they are Indian or have spent a substantial amount of time in India. Being Indian myself, I didn't sense any racist intent. You're right that they are pulling numbers out of their ass. But from my own personal experience, drivers in India drive extremely aggressively, and regularly do things that would be an instant fail in any US road test.
On Fauci, see https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1342752109486166016 among other tweets from me naming him.

I think Fauci fell a beat behind the narrative marching band in March when he said no to masks for the general population, and so had to make up a dumb story in June about how he nobly lied to save PPE for frontline workers in March. This is obviously false (HCWs wear fitted N95 or better masks, must maintain and keep both good fit and a working backup; these masks are not for gen-pop) and still bad for credibility (lying for the greater good is lying, and the greater good story of PPE conservation was itself a lie).

Fauci is a dishonest careerist who has harmed many people over decades and misspent huge budgets. Larry Kramer knew this. Kary Mullis agreed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtgUGxxzB_c.

On masks, see https://rationalground.com/mask-studies and read the linked papers yourself, don't rely on Wikipedia. The Danish RCT was held up for political reasons (https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1317875526997102594), then published only with some weasel words added as quote-bait to deflect from the actual results: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817.

Coronaviruses show strong latitude-dependent seasonality per Hope-Simpson's pioneering work on respiratory viruses. NPIs don't much affect disease progression. Correlation is not causation but anti-correlation is a big problem for those arguing masks help:

https://rationalground.com/mask-charts/

https://rationalground.com/more-mask-charts/

I'm old, and per the CDC's estimated age-cohort IFR (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena... — see Scenario 5 column, note IFR figures there are per unum not percentages), therefore more at risk of death from Covid-19. I wear a mask in any bad, mixed, or unknown-quality indoor air environment. This is my risk analysis and my choice, not yours. I don't wear outdoors and no one should, all contact tracing studies I've read agree on this (so do the many hypocritical politicians who've gone maskless without fear). So I object to gray-area-legal mandates for all, especially for young people.

The policy reversal on masks last spring was not based on new science. It was in part a big rip-off (Newsom paid 4x and spent >$1B of the California taxpayers' money, this was obviously skimmed here before net-settled to China), and in large part a compliance exercise. That you jump into HN to police my dissenting stance is frankly worse in my view than Fauci being a corrupt careerist. I expect better from hackers and engineers.
> "Well, the same argument has been made before regarding offshoring and so far that hasn't seemed to have spurred any major declines in total compensation."

Yes, but things are different this time (famous last words, I know). Prior to COVID-19, offshoring was competing with the convenience of having everybody in the same physical space. Now, with every tech company currently having nearly all of their staff working from home, they are learning to make the equivalent of offshoring work; they have no choice in the matter if they want to continue operating. It's a small, small jump from there to outsourcing to low cost of living regions or even real offshoring.
Yeah, I don't think that's true. The most recent story I can find about them does involve pay cuts, but they're voluntary and temporary as a way of dealing with the pandemic: https://www.geekwire.com/2020/gravity-payments-employees-vol...
It doesn’t. I think just often, including in the OP, the term no/low code is used to speak about the visual subset of the problem. I agree with you in that higher level text abstractions are low code as well.
Scientific knowledge is _always_ wrong in a strict sense. Every law, every theory has a confidence interval attached. Every measurement, an error bar. Sometimes that confidence interval is really, really big, like our model of how gravity works when things aren't too big or moving too fast. Sometimes those error bars are really, really big, like how we though non-HEPA masks wouldn't really help prevent the spread of a novel airborne virus, so more conservative pandemic mitigations were necessary to prevent unnecessary deaths. The good news is that the scientific process emphasizes and incentivizes increasing those confidence intervals and reducing errors (but never eliminating them—that's impossible). We know a lot more now than we did this time last year. It's why we have not just one but several safe and effective vaccines, for example.
So far in human history, most authority was ultimately based on violence. Policing in the real world requires violence (not necessarily of the physical kind). Policing by a violence monopoly is the basis for governance and for the enforcement of rights and obligations like property laws or contracts and the punishment of transgressions. It seems to me that digital decentralization cannot solve this, but only cause further fragmentation (as explored in science fiction books like Freedom™ or Snow Crash). The world is already multipolar, does it need to be more fragmented? Rights, justice and other concepts are of course just abstractions, but will the world be a better one where the lines between actors are even more blurred? With clear hierarchies, planning becomes much easier. Are governance and other complex processes like public research and development even possible without some centralized financial and political authority?
Only because of GPL3, otherwise everyone would still be using GCC nowadays.
I wanted right click to delete but haven't implemented yet. For now there's a workaround for this, you can enter this URL which contains only two points: (or any pair of 12 numbers)

https://digital-pottery.glitch.me/?0,-179,-30,0,-30,-32,-135...
So in the worst case, temperatures would drop back to what? The fifties? I can live with that, I think.

But is there more to this than just temperatures? Is solar radiance important for other factors as well (besides the obvious like crops and solar power)?
Visual J++?

> Some observers have remarked that this incompatibility appears to have been a deliberate aim of Microsoft's, in an attempt to at least slow the advance of Sun's Java technology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_J%2B%2B
I just copied the amount of LTC requested on the page and didn't do any USD conversions (my local currency is not USD). If fees and such were taken, or something, I have no idea, but that sounds like what happened.
This is a joke, right? There is no law that gives them any sort of power. This is like a PTA meeting.
Yes, I know. :D Your previous project with Unsplash made me try a similar approach [1] for banners of video games on Steam.

[1] https://github.com/woctezuma/steam-image-search
Looks like there's no connection pooling

Warning: mysql_connect(): User yingling_sandbox already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in /home/content/41/5598741/html/random/calvin_and_hobbes/search.php on line 10
Unable to connect to database! Please try again later.
So you're saying one engineer who's good at lots of things can be replaced by a dozen engineers who are only good at one thing?

It doesn't work that way because coordination costs are a big part of the cost.
Post-publish review is something that should probably be improved. It can't exactly be open to the public to contribute but equally the public should be able to see if scientists have (anonymous) serious doubts about a paper.
>Only culture can do that

That is an excellent point. It reminds me of the "Money does not motivate developers" articles on here recently.
As long as there is a massive income differential between the average American/Canadian/European and the average Nigerian, skimming through the hundreds of millions of rich Westerners with Internet access in order to find a few (hundred? thousand?) dumb enough to send money to a scammer is going to be a profitable business strategy.

Someone trying to establish a legitimate business servicing a Western market is going to have a much harder time identifying profitable customers from 5,000 miles away, especially since the Indian outsourcing firms have been developing the infrastructure for this kind of thing in their own countries for decades.

Developing more entrepreneurs in Nigeria is a Good Thing, but I doubt it will have much of an impact on the scam business.
Custom variables are also useful for doing A/B testing, you could use the same method used here to set a couple of values and then you can measure goal conversion grouped by the value of the custom variables.
This story is pretty weak. What they apparently have are a bunch of anomalies from extremely coarse geophysical surveys. Aerial surveys even! That's about four steps from having deposits, in the same way that having a bunch of startup ideas is about four steps away from an exit. Each of those steps results in major winnowing.

The next logical phase of exploration would be having geologists hiking and driving around on these prospects to try to understand the specific geology of each. If things look good then maybe a program of surface level geophysical surveys, which are far more precise than aerial surveys (though still pretty fuzzy). Finally some (very expensive) exploratory drilling, then a lot more drilling to establish with some certainty the size of the deposit. Now you have a mineable property.

By the way, at every step you need a bunch of skilled people on location who currently have plenty of work opportunities in non-war zones.

Sure, there are almost certainly good mines to be found since it's a huge country and mineral exploration has been on hold for thirty years and was pretty spotty before then. But saying that aerial geophysics surveys confirm this is pretty funny.

EDIT: It looks like some ground geophysical surveys have been done as well. But no drilling as far as I can tell from the story.
"No ads" is huge for many of us. I'll pay $7/mo to not have my time wasted & wallet seduced & continuity unbroken. Children in particular I want not exposed to ads, as they suddenly & passionately want something stupid (PopTarts? A teddy bear with a fishbowl for a belly? SpongeBob anything? Borderline R-rated trailers? WTH? keep that crap away from my under-7yo kids).

Redbox at $1.50 vs. iTunes at ~$4 is a fine tradeoff per: cheap & max data rate but travel time & unpredictable availability vs. right now & always available vs. marginally more expensive & lower data rate.

As for buttons, why does the "Play" button not do anything when "Play" is selected on the disc menu? on _every_ disc player out there?!?
The point of the lower limit on the value of the company is not based on what might turn out to be a 1 billion dollar company. There are many more ideas in hardware than there are in software, purely based upon how accessible it seems. If you are solving anything close to an important problem, you will eventually reach a $10B valuation. A software company can grow to a reasonable size that is nowhere close, but hardware companies don't follow the same path.

Solving a problem with hardware either solves a problem or replaces the thing that fixed the problem before. Solving a problem with software is usually (if not always) making computers better or easier to use. The underlying difference is how clear the change is in the user's life.

The much larger cost to develop and produce hardware like some in the comments have been discussing leads us to value hardware much more significantly than software. It might be due to iTunes, Java, and Windows update making people mad when they waste their time, or have their computer shut down on them in the middle of their work, but there is a significant bias.
That was definitely my confusion, thanks.
> Dolly was conceived through surrogacy after the death of her brother, international archer and coach Cherukuri Lenin, in a road accident in 2010 reports said.

> Her father, Cherukuri Satyanarayana, said she had been trained since birth to be a champion.

> "You can't put too much pressure on children, they can be trained for a maximum of two or three hours a day," he said. "But Dolly comes from a family of archers so she's capable of a lot."

eeks. :(
To expound on this, look at profit of product negating development. For software, it is nearly full profit. I sell you my app for $4. The app cost me $0.04 to sell. Each additional copy of the app costs almost nothing. Essentially, just Crtl-C, Ctrl-V. Yes, there are hosting costs, Apple's marketplace for apps costs, etc. But hardware has very similar costs too; they cancel out. For a hardware product, to make another copy of the product will eat a lot more of the profits. Essentially, software is cheaper because you can make billions of products for essentially the same cost as thousands with respect to hardware.
I was- tried it on a private server, as you would, and didn't entirely get its utility at the time. My opinion is that great projects (products?) always have two outstanding versions: the CLI, and the GUI. Problem is that whoever makes the CLI can't make the GUI or they miss the point of what the GUI can offer that the CLI can't, and vice-versa.
Nope. Not a joke. We’re faster too: https://youtu.be/UuY7CWdvyWM
You mean this comment, right?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6185322

Think about it this way: other countries have no apparent problem feeding high-caliber talent into overtly, unmistakably evil applications of offensive security. Look at China, for instance.

I don't think the Snowden saga had zero impact on recruiting at NSA; I just think the long-term marginal impact to NSA staffing is negligible.

Worth adding: this article and my comment can't really falsify each other; they're somewhat orthogonal.
I really enjoy my Samsung Chromebook 2. The only thing I wish it had more of is computing power, RAM and screen space. Too bad there aren't very many 15" 8GB RAM Chromebooks on the market which makes the Chromebook Pixel 2 all the more painful to lust after, despite it not being 15".

TL;DR. Crouton + Chromebook FTnearW! (Would still like to keep the secure boot, though.)
Maybe this is just a case of comparing a tech demo (the car) against a deployed system. Presumably hospital software will gradually improve in the future.
It may go against your ethics, but that's a problem you will have to resolve within yourself. Even if you think it's unethical, you don't have the right to prevent other people from marrying same-sex partners or eating beef. The same goes for working for oil companies, weapons manufacturers, or the NSA.
Three things define American culture when it comes to economic values, decisions, and status:

1) The Lottery Effect
"...the other main reason Americans seem so unperturbed by the widening chasm between the rich and everyone else is what I like to call the lottery effect. Buying lottery tickets is clearly an irrational act -- the odds are hugely stacked against us. But many millions of us do, because we see the powerful evidence that an ordinary person, someone just like us whose only qualifying act was to buy a ticket, wins our favorite lottery every week. For many Americans, the nation’s rowdy form of capitalism is a lottery that has similarly bestowed fabulous rewards on the Everyman." - http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/21/rising-wealt...

2) Last Place Aversion
"that poor Americans’ antipathy toward redistribution might be due not to their desire to one day be at the top of the income distribution, but to their fear of falling to the bottom. We show that humans have a deep psychological aversion to being in “last place” -- recall the shame of being picked last in gym class -- such that individuals near the bottom of the income distribution may be wary of redistribution because it could help those just below them leapfrog above them." - http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/19/do-taxes-nar...

3) The Just World Fallacy
"The just-world hypothesis (also called the just-world theory, just-world fallacy, just-world effect, or just-world phenomenon) refers to the tendency for people to want to believe that the world is fundamentally just. As a result, when they witness an otherwise inexplicable injustice they rationalize it by searching for things that the victim might have done to deserve it. This deflects their anxiety, and lets them continue to believe the world is a just place, but often at the expense of blaming victims for things that were not, objectively, their fault." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

Hopefully articles like this will get more people to understand these things.
No. Raising money only changes risk allocation, not downside risk, unless you increase the value of the equity, which "raising money" doesn't do on its own. The valuation might increase at the same time, but that effect would not be just from "funding" but rather from non-money aspects of the partnership.

There are all sorts of crazy agreements one could think up, but basically if a funding agreement increases your downside risk, it's really not so much about the funding but rather about a fundamental change in the venture. Otherwise, why do it?

Of course you can enter an agreement where you increase the risk of the venture failing significantly. But that's not fundraising, and it's probably not smart, either. And the risk of staying small is sometimes underestimated.

If you enter into a funding agreement where you put in your own money, or a loan you personally guarantee, that would increase your downside risk. But it's also not fundraising, because it's your money.
Oh, everyone assumed the government knows anything anyway, long before Snowden.

I remember after the Boston Bombings, people were complaining, saying things like "How could the government be so incompetent as to not stop this before it happened? They monitor everything on the Internet, so they should have known!". This was before Snowden.

Years before that, I remember people were casually talking about Room 641A. This would be about 2005 or so.

Everyone assumed the government snarfs all Internet data long before Snowden, and almost nobody cared.
It is expected that they change their mandate and start buying corporate bonds directly

https://thesoundingline.com/do-not-allow-the-fed-to-buy-corp...
How are the keys exchanged? At the end of the day zoom holds the keys. What matters, legally, is their privacy policy. If you don’t trust that then you have no business using a program that brokers encryption keys.
This is the correct advice. Other major distributors in the US have been massively scaling up to receive all non-essential goods that normally would be distributed through Amazon, carrying them through their own logistics infrastructure. These goods are then being delivered through the retail channels that these distributors currently support, which may not be where you are traditionally used to buying these products online.

Source: I share a social distancing space with someone that currently is doing exactly this distribution shift for their global supply chain, moving all of Amazon's capacity to an alternate major distributor they use.