skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The manipulation of Google data (Google Bombing) has been going on for years in political circles. The only problem here is Google takes its time removing bad links for Republicans, but for Democrats, they have bad links taken down in a matter of days.

Case in point? The obvious manipulation of Google results for Rick Santorum (a Republican presidential candidate at one point) which continued to have x-rated results for his name when searched in Google FOR OVER 6 YEARS.

Compare that to other quick searches for Anthony Weiner or John Edwards and you hardly get one or two bad stories about them in the first ten results.
They are moving the ECC for DNS record signing, not HTTPS certificates.
> “For young women the problem in navigating sexuality and relationships is still gender inequality,” says Elizabeth Armstrong, a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan who specializes in sexuality and gender. “Young women complain that young men still have the power to decide when something is going to be serious and when something is not—they can go, ‘She’s girlfriend material, she’s hookup material.’ … There is still a pervasive double standard.

Women try and find the best man they can possibly get. Just because 50% of the population is female and 50% is male doesn't mean that they're going to pair off equally. Women want the top 20%! [1] There are evolutionary reasons for this that push our species forward, mating always has and always will be a competition.

Now think of the perspective of these top 20% guys. They get all the sex and need not give out their exclusive commitment. And why would they? From an economic perspective, they can maximize their sexual strategy this way (spread the seed, as it were). Monogamy just slows that down.

Furthering the economics analogy, these dating apps increase the liquidity and efficiency of the market. Want Chad, the good looking investment banker guy? Keep swiping, you'll find him. No need to wait around for Bobby from your programming class to finally ask you out (he probably doesn't even lift weights).

There are two groups clearly disadvantaged by this current setup:

1) Those 80% of "below average" males. Because one of the top males can satisfy many young women (you read the story, some guys sleep with 100+ girls a year), these men get left out. Traditionally, marriage existed as an incentive for the vast majority of men to be productive in exchange for reproduction opportunities. I'm sure the discerning reader wouldn't be surprised to learn that a girl sleeping with a bunch of top 20% dudes and later "settling down" has a harder time staying in a happy marriage [2].

2) Which leads us to #2, unmarried women entering their 30s, or whatever arbitrary later age makes them less attractive to the top 20% men. The reality of male preference for physical attractiveness necessarily means that women who engaged in hook-up culture during their earlier years will have to lower their standards.

We had a period of time where strict monogamy throughout adulthood dominated, and now that's becoming less so (hugely declining marriage rates as one indicator, [3]). The question is whether or not this is a natural evolution for our society, or a sign of decline.

---

[1] - "As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. "
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dati...

[2] - "They claim this finding is especially true for women, writing in the report, "We further found that the more sexual partners a woman had had before marriage, the less happy she reported her marriage to be.""
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/more-sexual-partner...

[3] - http://national.deseretnews.com/article/4535/US-marriage-rat...
> RE: The project itself: looks like they're still working on getting it to work on ARM, which is strange considering that iOS is ARM...

Why is that strange? That iOS also runs on ARM doesn't help them very much for running stuff on ARM-based windows devices.
And this is the entire article in a sentence. Bravo.
I am 25. I agree with you completely, just disabled my Facebook the other day, and I've started corresponding long-form with some of my friends. I feel much closer to them than I ever did before.

The more I stay away from social media (and to some extent, the internet), the better person I become. Instead of putzing around on the internet, I read books and listen to informative podcasts. Instead of looking at how other people live and lamenting my own life, I just do what makes me happy without worrying about opportunity cost.

I too work in tech. I feel like people can live however they want to live, and perhaps they will even have enough time to change their ways if they change their minds, but that life is just not for me - the easiest way for me to know that for a fact is that I simply can't bear to hang out with such people.
Can you imagine how pets are going to react to this?

A real-world use-case involves this in a garage, and you pull into the garage (or tell the car to) and it parks and then this snake starts its dance and finds the chargeport and connects and starts charging... and your dog goes completely ape-shit. And barks and shrieks and jumps and snaps its teeth and gets a nice vise-grip with the snake in its jaws and next thing you know, just like in cartoons, you suddenly see a black silhouette of the dog and inside the silhouette the white skeleton bones of said dog flashing brightly as it electrocutes itself at 80 amps and 240 volts. Tesla 1, Dog 0.
Senior Front End Engineer  Area 1 Security
>“Tinder sucks,” they say. But they don’t stop swiping.

Well... stop swiping?
"...the game is out there, and it's either play or get played..." - Omar, The Wire

Nowadays, if a single guy doesn't use Tinder and other apps, it's missing a huge pool of single girls available to meet for a drink (or other things).

It's never been so easy to meet new people, so guys don't value so much the girls they met like before, but it's the same for girls. If the pool of single girls it's huge, imagine the pool of single guys on this apps.

I know a lot of girls who uses Tinder only to inflate their ego and play with guys. They have never met one guy through Tinder. Sometimes they even mark a date with a guy and "disappear" before that just for fun.
On the third point, my sense is that the part of AR that is often expensive is building full objects, when you often only need a few of their attributes. This is not such a big deal with a single (or a few) `find`s, but often is when you're grabbing lots of records, even when using `includes` properly. I find myself using `pluck` frequently when tracking down performance issues.

I often wish for a pared down database interaction API (I hesitate to call it an ORM) that just exposes raw data, and provides a convenient query interface (like AR does, but also like raw arel). Maybe this is what Sequel does, and I should be using that, I'm not sure. I was excited about datamapper2 and I've looked at ROM[0], but I'm not sure it's what I'm dreaming of. I could probably cobble it together by using existing database driver gems and arel directly. Unfortunately, as is usually the case when considering venturing off the beaten path of Rails, this sort of thing would give up a lot of the "conventions" advantages of Rails. AR pretty much is Rails.

[0]: http://rom-rb.org/
It's "power" in the same way that a hiring manager inundated with resumes from desperate job-hunters is in a position of power over them.
I think, though, that this case really highlights the extent to which Knuth's quote gets used in a much wider context than he intended. In the context he was explicitly talking about micro-optimization, not large-scale performance-impacting decisions.

The use of the word "prematurely" combined with the tendency to forget the context of that quote means it takes on connotations of implying that if you do something for performance from the get-go, that's bad. That just ain't so; sometimes you really do know what you're doing, and know that one option won't be workable and other one will. Choice of data structures is a case where this often happens. If you know up front that you're going to need O(1) random access and replacement, and O(1) typical case and O(N) worst case appending, and that persistence is not necessary, then you already know you want a mutable list. In that case starting with a persistent equivalent and planning to rework things later is likely just a waste of time and, assuming you're doing this at work, money.
Hum, excuse me, but since when is the ObjFW runtime old? It supports modern ObjC quite fine and is still in active development with the last changes being from this year. However, the one used here seems to be from 2012 for some reason, instead of one from 2015.
I thought I agreed with you about 'cheaping of human communication' until a couple of years ago. I believed that Snapchat was the worst thing to happen to human communication, and somehow that human interactions had been fundamentally changed for the worse.

Then last year, I went on a 2-month long backpacking trip. I don't have facebook et al. and blogs are too tiring, so I decided to get snapchat just for the trip. A year later, I've gotten ~20 people to join snapchat, just to keep in touch with me. : )

For me, it's the model of human communication that matters: I don't necessarily want you to remember exactly what I said to you 12.27465 years ago. I know most of the HN and Reddit crowd aspire for the perfect object Vulcan mind, with perfect recollection either, but for me, the value of interpersonal communication lies in the fact that it's REALLY fallible. Not only do we NOT remember things as they are, even if we do remember something right, the act of remembering it messes up the actual memory. For me, that's essential. Our social interactions haven't evolved to reflect a perfect recollection but to accommodate our limitations. We are imperfect, and I like my mode of communication to reflect that.
> We break up easier, divorce easier, and refuse to live unhappy lives because the idea of being alone is no longer terrifying.

And funnily enough we seem to be a hell of a lot less happy.
This is nothing new for Humans either: http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/03/neolithic-culture-may...
I definitely agree. People treat human-like intelligence as if it were the only possible kind, as if human-ness were a natural consequence of intelligence.
My probably wrong impression of Dropbox is that it's virtually unchanged since Day 1. I certainly cannot tell much difference except the the Mac menu is now less useful.
This article relies on carefully constructed images that maximize one particular outcome by summing up lots of small errors into it.

For it to work, the pixels have to be very accurately tweaked. If the tweaks were off by one pixel, the whole thing would fall apart.

The assumption is that this cannot be done to a person. But there is no way to put in a pixel-level "exploit of sorts" into a person to test that theory.

The real answer is probably that a little bit of noise on the input probably disrupts the exploit. It could never happen to a person because eyes have noise. At the same time, it could never happen to a robot either because cameras have noise.
contraception has empowered women on the same level as men, who traditionally always had the pick of the litter, still carry the artifacts of oppression, slut shaming, etc.

it's not a stretch to say that contraception technology has directly catapulted women's rights and are becoming more equal to the male counterpart.
Not revenge. Every month sooner that the A-bomb brought the war's end was about 100k-250k civilians saved in the co-prosperity sphere. In the western narrative, the number of deaths the Japanese caused in their own region is rarely compared against the number who died in the atomic bombings.
Well, Tinder doesn't even position itself as a place to find long-term relationships, so trying to make it work in such a way is an uphill battle from the get go.
You really can't know though, unless it's explicitly stated in their profile which I doubt it's very common.
Blogspam. Original post is at http://www.businessinsider.com/hampton-creek-ceo-complaints-...
This is great. What are some good keywords to search on to learn more about topics like this? "distributed systems" seems too broad, and I'm sure there are whole fields of research into these types of concurrency problems. Any suggestions?
IMHO, precious moment when bug is found in the code AND it is not obvious, so you need to run debugger, is perfect time to improve your code. It indicates that code is complicated, or not well covered, or poorly commented (because bug is not noticed at peer review). You are going to test this piece of code anyway, because you need to check is bug fixed, so why not to spare some time to make code better and battle-test your improvement: if you catch bug in the process, then you improved code, if not: keep going.

And no, I am not talking about asserts. Assertions are only small part of real debugger.

Typical tools I use in my own programs are: good logging and tracing, which are able to explain what happens inside program without spamming me, some test cases for critical parts and for fixed bugs. Often, I will also split large program or script into smaller independent parts, with their own options, configuration, loggind and test cases. It's all.
People have been writing about the casual sex explosion for ever since the internet hit mainstream but reports also say millenials have less partners than their baby boomer parents did.

Hard to say what is accurate.
Not really. You still need a Mac to sign the app, and a Mac to deploy to iOS hardware.
As a programmer, I don't own any line of code or algorithm which I leverage. I am skilled labor, pure and simple. And you as an artist are also skilled labor.

No, that's an economic decision you made to enter into a work-for-hire arrangement instead of selling your own product/service - whose assets you would own - and you are now trying to foist that economic arrangement on other people who don't want to enter into it.

But today's small time writer isn't working the gravy train any more than the musician is. If anything, both musician and writer are just could/would be profiteers.

Well, excuse me for wanting to create and sell my own literary product. WTF.

What should happen is that copyright should largely (and in my opinion solely) apply to companies. And it should be by default that the majority of all proceeds be held in trust to the creator of the work even if the company in question offered the means to produce said proceeds.

It seems as if you propose establishing a more equal playing field by abolishing the economic incentive for capital owners to invest money in the production of cultural goods.

It should be up the creator of the work to register for the copyright as before the 1970s. And it should be easy as filling out a form on the web with a copy of the original work in question for verification with the US Copyright office or its analogs in other countries.

Well, this is how it works now if you want to recover statutory damages. I create work, I pay $50 to register with the copyright office and supply a deposit copy, eventually I get a receipt and if someone infringes on the copyright I can recover punitive damages. Otherwise I'm limited to economic damages which are a lot trickier to recover, as many infringers can hide behind shell companies and just let them go bankrupt. In practice publication deals typically require that the copyright be registered in advance of the deal so as to avoid messy and expensive litigation at a later date over exactly when the work was created, likewise many publishers prefer to be approached by attorneys or literary agents rather than by authors, precisely because those professionals will have the legalities in order at the commencement of negotiations and publishers will know exactly what they're buying.
You know what's great about open source? You can contribute to it! :)
> Theoretically

Well, when they show, in practice, that such an attack is possible, then we can have news headlines about it.

By presenting it like this so Tesla had to patch it to save face, I'm sure they just closed the loophole that would allow consenting car owners to modify their car's software. As a gear-head and life-long tinkerer, I WANT to be able to mess with my car.
If you don't want to buy Apple hardware, why are you bothering with iOS?
The cost of a bad marriage seems like "less" so some people are less discriminating in deciding to take the plunge.
I can relate to this. Good post. What kind of music do you make?
iOS developers already deal with this every year apple extends the Apis and there are various techniques to using the extended Apis and falling back to the old ones
Speakers of artificial languages are probably influenced by the syntax of their native languages, so yes, I suspect we'd see dependency length minimization when people speak those languages too.
Sure. I was just making the point that as a business partner, they have a lot of things beyond a DDA offering that they need to fix.

When you are trying to get 100% of the investor's money back after a hard run that didn't make, it makes one feel a bit raw to have sand thrown in your gears in process. And the cool thing about getting investors whole is that they'll show up to your next party. If I had remained a fan of SVB, the investors would not have allowed them back at the table after some of the things that occured. If all that SVB is is money, I can that from GE Capital. I start to question what value they are bringing to the table.

I know-- anecdote is not data and all that.

None of this is meant as commentary against what's going on in the head-line story. I could see this being a solid win for both parties. Yay. I like happy middle-ings.
Children Beating Up Robot Inspires New Escape Maneuver System
All those men want to talk to her. She decides if she wants to reply to them or just ignore them. I would find it odd to claim the men were holding the power in this situation.

The neat thing about Tinder is that nobody has to assess those first-contact messages, they just swipe people they think they'd be interested in and if they both like each other, they can talk. I've never used it but I'd say it's probably equalized a lot of things--men no longer spend all their time carefully composing introductory messages only to be ignored, women don't (necessarily) have to sort through hundreds of "wanna fuk?" messages to find the decent ones.
Actually, I think Lisp has a pretty high average DLM compared to natural languages, which partly explains why some people have so much trouble with it. You can, by just dropping in a pair of parens, arbitrarily separate concepts from one another in a Lisp sentence. In fact, one primary complaint when reading Lisp is trying to pair up closing parens with their opening partners. Do if this research shows anything, it's that Lisp could never have developed as a human language naturally.

.. So I guess it really must have been ordained by the gods, after all, then.
SEEKING FREELANCER - Remote, US time zones preferred

Magento/PHP developer needed.

We are an ecommerce startup and part of our system uses Magento. The original developers are no longer available and I need assitance with some Magento customization and configuration. I'm an iOS + Ruby engineer and don't have a lot of experience with Magento. Would love to find someone who can help with a few tasks and walk me through a things.

Email in profile.
Neat! Nice to see that there were hacky thinkers back in the day :)
This article bothers me for several reasons, mostly given the interviews are all based in NY and are a focal point of the article. As a 24-yr old coming from outside Portland, OR, I don't see this trend much at all with my coworkers or friends. Most have used it once or twice, but not as serious as they make it out to believe. A lot of my friends are in committed relationships or are looking for them. Maybe I am an outlier, but I think outside SF, LA or NY, these dating apps aren't as prevalent as they seem.
"Side effect" means something that happens implicitly as a result of evaluation. There's no need to ban the term; we just need to keep in mind how it differs from the more general notion of "effect".
The number isn't plucked out of thin air and has some variance due to factors such as reaction speed and speed of the runner, but it's an average. 21 feet is a good "rule of thumb" but isn't an exact measurement of "safe distance". You could have a bit more distance - you could have less. It's a rule of thumb.

>Tueller Drill departs from the premise that you can only use your hand gun. This attitude is part of the problem.

TASER guns have a single shot. I wouldn't risk my life on me hitting my target in a single shot. Stunguns require proximity.

For pepperspray, would you bet your life on an 85% chance of something working? OC spray is not 100% effective and some people are straight up immune to the spray. AFAIK, humans are not immune to bullets.

I'd advocate for the use of the above non-lethals in reliable scenarios where the officer is concerned about possible escalation but does not yet feel to be in mortal danger. Which isn't many scenarios and draws into question if force was needed at all. Many non-lethal actions seem to be punished more than lethal actions, because "if force was necessary it should have only required lethal force if their life was in danger".

Which brings me back to the "legitimate danger" vs "public concept of danger" issue...

If you want more non-lethal options to be used, the justification of using them needs to be realistic - which involves educating the public on what is and isn't a dangerous/escalating scenario. I don't see that happening anytime soon, which is unfortunate.
A Submerged Monolith Near Sicily: Evidence for Mesolithic Human Activity
90% of copyright is handling registrations and settling transfers, updating the account books at various places... just a shit ton legal and accounting grunt work. We've got skyscrapers filled with said grunts all over the Western world.

Enforcement has always been separate, even before copyright and from the very beginnings of the Stationers monopoly.

Despite the existence of the High Commission, the reality of censorial control of the press at this time did not primarily lie with the stationers. Certainly, they had a role to play in the politics and practice of sixteenth century censorship,[24] but in fact it was not the stationers but rather "[t]wo long-standing institutions, parliament and the royal prerogative, [that] proved to be Elizabethan England's most useful means for effecting censorship" [Clegg, Press Censorship in Elizabethan England, 19]

http://www.copyrighthistory.org/cam/tools/request/showRecord...

It really could just be as easy as writing a computer program. Spotify is basically a voluntary collection agency that honors IP contracts.

If we can make it so the legal and accounting services are computerized, with software both writing and enforcing contracts, we could make copyright registration and transfer settlement incredibly cheap. That's the main reason why copyright law has favored those who can pay the lawyers and accountants the most, they have always been necessary in order to make the entire system function.
Either there's an off-by-one error or there's a weird design decision. Typing "y c" doesn't include the "c" in the search (so it lists websites like Yahoo first) but "y co" finds Y Combinator.
Deep Learning Tips from the Road | SciPy 2015 | Kyle Kastner https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBBtOeY2Q78