jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
>The only country that has ever used nuclear arms and that currently holds one of the largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons is not engaging in this diplomatic effort to further the interest of those that would like to see nuclear weapons disappear, they do so because they would like to maintain their edge.

So every American or Russian or other person from a nuclear power that argues in favor of non-proliferation is simply looking to "maintain their edge?"

>In those places a single nuclear weapon could kill millions, and it would take a very large effort to add to the scale of devastation.

Which is exactly why some of us think it'd be nice to keep even more of them from being built.

>The US is like the parent that tells its children not to smoke because smoking is bad for your health but can not give up smoking themselves.

Real progress is nearly impossible in an all-or-nothing world.

>Pakistan already has all the nuclear weapons it needs, and so does India, and neither of those countries will give them up because of pressure from the US, they will only give them up because they themselves, together will decide that a nuclear stand-off is to nobodies benefit.

Pressure from the US and Russia already helped divert at least one potential nuclear crisis between the two countries.[1] Is your argument seriously that the US should just shrug its shoulders and stand aside? I don't see how there's any other logical conclusion to this line of thought you're going down.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001%E2%80%932002_India%E2%80%9...

EDIT:

Of particular note in that article:

"A Defense Intelligence Agency report in May 2002 estimated that a nuclear war between India and Pakistan could, in a worst-case scenario, lead to 8–12 million deaths initially and millions more later from radiation poisoning."

On a subcontinent of over a billion people, it could be a lot worse. Sounds like a strong argument for keeping it from being able to.
Ah, I understand: my grammar was unclear. I just saw the first page, where it said "free," and I was confused about what the economics of the plan were. I don't care if it is free, and in fact that free factor was a concern, since I was wondering how it stayed in business. Clicking through and seeing the pricing, I understand now.
The question was more "how does it stay in business," not, "in what way is it free."
: )
The "obvious" portion of that makes it a little less
strict than your quotation.

The "obvious" portion is what makes it such a problem. If you have one library for a task, then the choice really is obvious. If you have two libraries, each very good but offering different takes on servicing a task, then "obvious" becomes a problem, and if "obvious" is a goal then one of those libraries becomes a problem.

"Obvious" is a problematic goal much like "fair" and "equal" are problematic goals in society. You end up sacrificing much that is good and valuable in pursuit of what is often a vague and situational ideal.
See:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1947768 (nyt link and discussion)
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1947813 (guardian)
The cables are not necessarily proof.
I did HEX > ASCII > BASE64 Decode... Got this.

---

ш 4ʄF ꇢʝ 0 ŉÁGۊ㩌挨ﻲn偃Y픤 맀㫍 zHvB塁ڟङ돒ٱ噭 ۻm큔員踥;U 35̆^ې5 躂FTѥ憆∻bI 1隤 7糃1s ÄàbrXÒ5㨄gP肂2똑 j gQ 7凮轋Dnظ Ɓए4o̤拢۪`z툃䇤 1喉鴌桘 xO挎E ệhʍϢU뵥f摗䪦驭 y秺f¬y靭欅鞞뭡ʮꆫ婨zƛ뫶

---

With some editing out of characters...

Yan Lei who suffer㫍Qie ې Da Cheng
ruin
Fenghun rope䇤throat Fengchui O destroyed ʍϢU
摗Yu秺
䰢Ren Ju scabbard 뭡 Lun 뫶

---

Not sure if I'm on to something but was interesting seeing the Chinese characters.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130825024428/https://twitter.c...

https://web.archive.org/web/20170718112930/https://twitter.c...

?
That wikipedia article is actually terrible, and so a great example of the confusion.

> refers to any or all network hosts on the Internet that no-one can reach.[1] According to some estimates, only 0.03% of the web is searchable, hence leaving almost 100.00% of all data being dark Internet

Apparently the wikipedia authors think that "network hosts that no-one can reach" is the same thing as "not searchable". I mean, a network host that no-one can reach is obviously not searchable (if really no-one can reach it, is it a 'network host' at all?), but a lot more is too, and of course it depends on what mechanisms you are using to search. Those estimates that "only 0.3% of the web is searchable" are surely not saying that 99.7% of the internet is "network hosts no-one can reach".

The wikipedia article goes on:

> Failures within the allocation of Internet resources due to the Internet's chaotic tendencies of growth and decay are a leading cause of dark address formation. One form of dark address is military sites on the archaic MILNET. These government networks are sometimes as old as the original ARPANET, and have simply not been incorporated into the Internet's evolving architecture.

I am not sure what they are talking about, and introduce a new term without explaining what it means, "dark address", what? If they really don't have routable IP addresses, are they part of 'the internet' at all, let alone 99.7% of the internet?

Hosts 'not incorporated into the internets evolving architecture' seems to be yet another thing again, although perhaps it's a subset of "network hosts that no-one can reach", but is an entirely different thing from Tor hidden services, and probably not a part of "websites not searchable [by Google?]" because they probably aren't "websites" at all, and arguably aren't on "the internet" at all if they were "not incorporated into the Internet's evolving architecture", whatever that means.

Really, the entire wikipedia article makes almost no sense from a technical perspective.

My non-technical friends hear various things about the 'dark net', and conflating different vague definitions, tell me they heard that the vast majority of the internet (nearly 100% according to wikipedia!) actually consists of pedophilia that you need special technical measures to access, or something like that.

Um.
https://www.darkscience.net/
Okay. I was at Amazon too in that time frame, and I don't recall the Sun to Linux transition to be all that big a deal.

Amazon was always at that time facing challenges on every front, the dot-com bubble breaking etc. There was a large build out of distribution centres around this time that was very expensive.

This was just one more of the challenges they faced. I may not have been senior enough to be privy to all the details, but I don't think this particular migration brought the company to near bankruptcy. That's a stretch.

I think the big migration was the database, and it took time, and Oracle was having some difficulties with running on Linux. But we were already using Linux boxes on our desktops since 1999. Webservers had switched to Linux around 1999. And migrating core code base which mostly C/C++ with Java starting to appear to Linux was mostly a challenge for the infrastructure teams and one of those routine large projects that every company has. I don't recall anybody talking of bankruptcy for this reason.
No doubt Solaris on SPARC was more reliable (particularly on higher-performance boxes) than Linux on x86 at the time, but tons of decent-sized hosting-type companies were running on Linux in the late 90s, and I worked at one. Obviously at Amazon's scale this was a massive migration, and giving up the support of Sun would be hard, but, hell, Google was launched on Linux at the time too.

That said, I was supporting Sparc Solaris through the late 2000s and the Oracle workloads were the last thing to move to Linux most places. The sheer power of the Sun boxes, along with the single-throat-to-choke was fairly unbeatable. No hardware vendor to look down their nose at you for using a "hobbyist" OS and imply that the problem must be at the Operating System level.

And, of course, you couldn't really replace those huge Sun Fire 6800 type servers with Linux.
we dont need half of that stuff. backup cam is fine (because of the stupid b pillars now) , tire pressure warning is probably cheap enough and not going to be hard to fab at more open foundaries but lane assist and brake assist. naw, fucking drive your car . plus all that self driving stuff makes it easier for cars to be totalled and bring repairs up because of all the sensors.
Does anybody else understand how DoorDash isn't swimming in money? They seem to extract value from every side of the transaction, underpaying drivers, stealing tips, charging the restaurants fees, charging the customers fees, and yet still somehow only posted a (tiny) profit for the first time last November (which, given Covid, seems to be driven more by larger economic trends rather than soundness of business model). Do they just spend all that money on developers and advertising?
Please don't take HN threads further into political flamewar. Just because we're already in a circle of hell is no reason to walk into a deeper circle. It's a reason to walk the opposite way.

We ban accounts that set flames like this, regardless of what color the flames are. No more of this please.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> San Francisco or Cambridge near the MIT campus would be a much cooler place to grow up.

Not sure how recently you may have been to San Francisco but it is not a place I'd take my kid (I live in the bay area) let alone live there with kids. The level of filth, crime and sadly mentally ill on the streets is not something I'd want to subject any child to.

> Kids have a much better time in real walkable cities

What makes the walkability "real"? I'm curious what has led to the HN meme that one can only walk places in Manhattan or comparably dense cities?

We live way out in nearly-rural suburbs. This is as walkable as it gets. The kid can walk to big parks nearby, libraries and movie theathers, shopping, etc. I walk to my office and just about everything is a short walk or bike ride away.

> Those suburbs are optimized for wealthy able-bodied adults age 35-60 who like driving their cars.

I'm in that demographic and feel exactly the opposite. These suburbs are for kids. It's a picture perfect place of safe independence for growing up. They can walk to each other's houses and play in the parks etc independently.
On one side you have people telling one group that there is a vast systemic conspiracy to exclude them from economic opportunity and murder them with impunity.

On the other side you have people telling another group that there is a vast systemic conspiracy to politically disenfranchise them and exclude them from the public sphere.

Both groups predictably view this as an existential threat and resort to violence. One is excused and even praised.
You need a crystal ball to draw correct conclusions about the future though. What's happening in threads like this is that people have completely lost control of their minds. I estimate that 90%+ of comments are people mistaking their imagination for reality - reality is mostly unknown, but you'd never know it from the way people talk.

It's almost as if people have been hypnotized or something. No one has the slightest concern for what is actually true. I hope it's only people on internet forums that are like this.
> Twitter is a private company.

Twitter is a publicly traded company, they agreed to abide by some restrictions by the government in order to get that status.
The most famous recent photo of Dennis Ritchie has him sitting in front of a windows desktop, drawterm-ed almost full screen into a Plan 9 CPU server. (drawterm is the name of the program that allowed you to connect local resources to a CPU server and essentially present a window on your current desktop as a Plan 9 terminal)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00221/97222...
The contractor who we were paying was known by other employees, so when someone else called into a status report sounding different they contacted my group (IT/Security). He was a devops engineer so we had to comb through all the access logs to ensure he (or his subcontractor with his credentials) did not access patient data (of course this was a medical project with HIPAA). Luckily he was just working on our QA environment so there was no risk of data exposure, but it could have been worse.

We were all shocked at how bold that move was!
Any advice on being a software engineer and moving to a Scandinavian country, Germany, or Austria specifically? I know German and would feel comfortable learning a Scandinavian language after studying Swedish for a while. My ideal would be to work remotely and live in the countryside, but if another situation is more realistic then that's fine too.
They agree. It's just that a) sometimes people lie about their intent; and, b) sometimes the courts have determined intent is not the most important thing, or even irrelevant.
Dang: could the title be changed to something more informative?

"Signal announces cryptocurrency: opinion"
LOL per il tuo nick :)
You say that like those are bad things.
Subsidizing anything should never be done trough tax breaks anyway. It just hides tax spending. Also this was about corporate taxes not private taxes. If a corporation "really needs a tax cut" its probably just unsustainable and if not it should find investors to bring the money voluntary not force spend the peoples money.

Yes the loopholes are intentional but it only helps very few individuals and a whole industry of layer, while corporations aren't actually in the business of finding tax loopholes they are indirectly forced to participate anyway because their competitor does. People blame the companies for evading taxes but they are not the problem they have to play along because everything else would be hard to explain to the shareholders.

Imagine if you are a business owner and your company slowly grows to amazon size. At what point would a sane person like to pay people to evade taxes? You would never want to do that instead of building a team of tax specialist or outsource that you could expand in real business. Your local small business owner and Jeff Bezos both have no interest in that.
Hello Ben, I'd received an email from you talking about this opportunity and I've responded but I have not heard back. My email - black11shadow@gmail.com
The novelty was using a computer to do this, which no one had done before. Prior to this invention, curing rubber was done manually.

Also, from my understanding an infinitely configurable computer and general-purpose computer aren't the same thing. Infinitely configurable means a new machine every time new software is installed, which would allow the invention to fall within the patent statutes. A general-purpose computer is not a new machine, has already been invented, and therefore trying to patent an "algorithm + GPC" would mean a patent on the algorithm, which is outside patent protection.
I don't see why it matters if software is math or not.

If the goal of the patent system is to encourage innovation and patenting software or math accomplishes it, then patent it. If not, don't patent it.

The real difference is in how it's used and created. Generally speaking everyone uses math, so if you could patent it you'd slow innovation for everyone. If you're patenting algorithms that take a few days to create and they can be applied across many domains, you're slowing innovation. Today this applies to math and software. It will soon apply to engineering physical objects as 3D printers, nanotech, etc.. will make it easier and faster. Basically if innovation in a field is easy enough, patents will slow it down and should not apply.

Obviously programmers want software to be special but if it was, the patent system would be less consistent than it currently is. If you want software to make sense in the patent system, just redesign the whole thing.
Against a GPU that can calculate five million hashes per second your salt isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
The Android installed base is 37% but only 31% of smartphone buyers-to-be want Android to be their next phone. The iPhone installed base is 27% but 30% of users want the iPhone to be their next phone. Whether or not this indicates the strength of Android, or the weakness of Android, depends on how many of those polled already own a smartphone. If most of the polled group don't own a smartphone at all, then it's pretty good for Android. If the polled group reflects current smartphone market share, then iPhone looks relatively strong, because that would indicate more existing Android owners want to move to the iPhone than vice-versa.

Other factors may also play a role. For example, Android is now outselling iPhone by a two to one margin. Most of these sales could be to people who have never had a smartphone before, and they could be totally wowed by Android. So it would make sense that these users, when polled, would prefer another Android phone--after all, it's miles better than the dumb phone that they were previously using. They've never used an iPhone and don't see why they need one, especially given the higher price of the iPhone (most Android phones are cheap, relatively speaking).
The AWS Outage is not over! Many RDS clients are still experiencing all kinds of issues. SimpleGeo got lucky, our RDS was also not in east 1-a but we still got creamed.
True, but the survey from the article is from January 2011-March 2011 so it was well before this promotion started.
I'd love to work for them. Unfortunately it looks like they haven't gotten around to putting up a "Jobs" page on their website yet.
Do you have examples of false articles he published? I can't find any examples of work he's done that comes close to comparing to Roger Stone's crimes.
Take the Supreme Court judges and how their rulings, and take issues that you can assume.

For atleast some of the judges, one can clearly have predicted how they would have voted. The justices might have just taken a vacation on the beach and just call in the vote...
If they are replacing, it is likely they have a few machines they run as servers and they refresh them every 4-5 years.
I mean they will just scrape your stuff, and if its simple blogs it is slightly easier to nab all that stuff vs Instagram. Isn't that what happened to Richard Stallman?
Well yes, taken.

The 2008 crisis was caused by irresponsible lending by the 1% with the effect of inflating costs for the 99%.

A bailout and a decade later we now see irresponsible lending by the Fed having the effect of inflating assets for the 1%.

Tails you lose, heads I win.
No, but I think they focused on solving their own problems (and building the perfect product for them). As they've made Basecamp on of their public products, though, there are product changes they could make so that it fits everyones use cases. Or they can keep it the way it is, and only companies that work exactly like them can benefit.

I'm not even saying they should change them, but for me, there are a few feature changes that would make it way easier for me to use (and therefore a rapid fan and repeat customer).
For the same reason StackExchange breaks up their Q/A sites into niches. It's a better experience for the user. It creates a community around the niche. A brand. It builds momentum faster. What if StackOverflow, MathOverflow and Startups were all part of the same general site? It would get messy. It would lose a lot of its value from being domain specific.

Also it's better for advertisers.

It's a good idea. There's nothing wrong with what Mahalo is doing here.
I remember "The Reading Lesson" by Stephen L Burns, published in Analog Science Fiction and Fact, in which there was a difference in the manner of reading. Some people read and retained, appreciating the word, and others were basically "Barking at Print," saying the words without any true internalisation or understanding.

I see that today with some young people, allegedly able to read, functionally "literate," but listening to them read out loud they are "barking at print," and when quizzed have no understanding of what they have just read.

It's not new, but it makes me wonder how we can help people to learn to read better.

The same goes to a greater or lesser extent for math.
The artist formerly known as the artist formerly known as Prince.
Can you expand on this? IE: Would someone pay to host their blog, or would someone pay to get access to someone else's blog? I've always been really curious about Posterous, Tumblr and all the others who come up against this problem (ie: great product with tons of users who love it and no clear monetization).
This is an arrogant post ignoring the skew towards technical users and users of cloud applications (which Rescuetime and Google Docs both are), similar to the way the Alexa results used to be skewed.

What bothers me is not the dumb post, but the fact that the author doesn't even try to explain the difference and apparently people behind Rescuetime defend the post here at HN as if it was real research.

No trend can be read out of this data.
Maybe they're referring to ad-hoc distribution, where you can only assign 100 devices to each developer account. They're testing on 200 iPhones and Androids, possibly more than 100 of which are iPhones, so they would need two developer accounts at $99 / year each.

But, the developer fee covers as many applications on those devices as you want, so the $200 / app figure is still unexplained.
Because I want to retain ownership of the data. Transmission is transient and I'm ok with outsourcing that to a little-known company, however storage is lasting and I want to retain meaningful control over it.

I understand that ties you to AWS and restricts your future options, but this might be a good place for you to start - targeting existing AWS users who need a little bit of extra automation.
4.5 years, not 45 years.
I'd give the winners some sort of virtual currency, in which they can use said currency to 'purchase' a gift certificate.
Rocket makes sense, but fat comma?
Not all JREs are - Jikes RVM for example is implemented in Java and yet has decent performance -

http://jikesrvm.org/FAQ#FAQ-GeneralWhatIs
There's also the potentially negative signal of the VCs not investing in a later round. They probably don't have first refusal rights (that would be a red flag) but if follow-up investments are the norm they probably may as well. That said, startups outside North America can't exactly be choosy with capital (I've seen founders chase 5-figure investments for months, at which stage you may as well fund yourself with consulting), and Seedcamp seems to be one of the best early-stage funds out there.
>but disagree that the FBI would act like this with a redneck in WV.

The only thing stopping them is that there's probably a few grey beards who remember the media hell they got for the Texas BBQ
Can we soon expect a 10980XE successor to have some Threadripper competitor as well? Or is it just Xeons?
"No true Scotsman" is a fallacy because "true Scotsman" doesn't have a clear definition and can mean anything. But "unsafe" has a very precise meaning in Rust. Safe Rust didn't have any data races, which is exactly what we would expect.
> You've made me curious to ask, what programming environments don't have a significant learning curve when you get to the hosting portion, short of a "no-code" hosting solution?

With java you can deploy a "fat jar" - a single executable that contains everything it needs, including the web server. You start the jar, it binds to a port, and you're done.
Certainly yes, but it usually takes longer than 3 minutes to figure stuff out. What I really need is an hour at least with a startup 1 on 1 to know if I'm really interested. But like I said above, that doesn't scale with so many companies and investors. So you have to trust your instincts, but there's often a herd mentality as investors talk to each other and try to use those signals to help them.
In the original Steam bug the asterisk is outside the double-quotes and path expansion definitely applies.