skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh, absolutely. I know people who subsist on nothing but ice cream, pasta, chipotle, and orange juice while not gaining significant weight. They aren't ripped, but they aren't overweight either.

In the aggregate of society, the hyper-ectomorph phenotype isn't what people are fighting against. But, we must not forget about them either. Excessive school lunch programs of calorie restriction aimed towards stopping "fat kids" just pains the skinny kids who need way more calories than the 8 year old borderline diabetics.

We need individual nutrition knowledge balanced against our body type. We can't say "everybody must do X," but we should say "People with A, B, C traits should really do X and Y to not be a health menace to society."
Selective end points. Dollar cost averaging is a simple way of solving this particular problem.
Microsoft is not driven by stupid people. I would expect that system update packets to home base would possess information that would be useful to MS researchers, among other things. Even if it's not there, MS should be experts in steganography. They don't have to leave you clues what they use.
If you're familiar with the command line, then the only OS I like personally is Arch Linux. You start with nothing more than a Bash shell (seriously, it doesn't even have an installer), install your OS onto a disk with a couple commands, and then install whatever software you want. I install the XFCE desktop environment and Firefox, and go from there. Arch doesn't try to babysit you or do things for you; you will be editing lots of plaintext config files from the shell. But it almost never breaks, because it only does what you explicitly tell it to. Very simple OS, great package management, cutting edge software, wonderful documentation.

To be clear, I do NOT recommend it for folks who don't want a learning curve. But once you've over that curve, it is a haven from shitty operating systems.
I like the attitude and point of view here, and I will also lift a glass to all the solo programmers. As far as I am concerned the actual act of writing code has always been transacted between a single brain and a keyboard. The article does seem to have a slightly dated desktop-oriented perspective, though. Isn't it fair to say that the mobile world reinvigorated the solo/small team development project?
"We're going to put out a lot of new products, and cancel most of them leaving our users high and dry. This will inspire yet more developers to jump on board."
It sounds like, "enough".
>If you really _just_ want "a good job" there are easier ways to do it than going to a 4 year university.

The weird thing is, if you replace "want \"a good job\"" with "want \"a good education\", that sentence is still true.

You can get a good education at a library, a bookstore, fucking around on the internet, and more recently, MOOCs.

Universities are still useful if you want to advance the state of the art, discover something new, and so on. Not so good if you just want to learn things already known by others.
ElementaryOS is the closest to OSX you will find. It's based off Ubuntu/Debian too.
If alternative medicine worked, believe me, the pharmaceutical companies would be edging in on that space.

If alternate medicine worked, it'd just be medicine.
JavaScript AST explorer
I've heard the Times interviewed hundreds of people. NOT that the hundreds of people all said the same thing. Unless you have some confirmation of that, I suspect the quotes in the article are the result of cherry-picking.
1) If you put all of your money in exactly 17 years ago, then, yes. You would be at the same place.

2) It still would've been paying you dividends that entire time

3) If you, rather than investing an imaginary lump sum at the top of the market 17 years ago, invested slowly as your savings accumulated over time, you would be ahead.

The FTSE hasn't exactly been sitting still all those 17 years.
what do you think a 401k does behind the scenes?
In 2008 I watched the market drop 5% every day for a week. That's blood in the streets. (And by Thur, it pretty much didn't matter what you bought, it was going to do great)

As of right now, the S&P 500 is down a little over 2%, that's pretty normal. I'm not even sure this is a paper cut.
> If you were using the Twitter API to defeat african warlords and Twitter decides that you're violating their ToS doing that and bans your account for it, well...you're SoL.

Not so fast, you can always use web scraping techniques as a defensive measure.
If you haven't stopped yet, this won't change anything.

Edit: bury me if you want, it doesn't make what I say any less true.
> And then....what? Well from a macro scale, I think some things get better -- overall population health goes up, obesity/fat-related diseases go down. But does heart disease? I wonder if it goes up -- if everyone looks like they've wanted by shutting off the body's fat stores, does the motivation to do cardio go down for some people?

I don't understand the tendency some people have to find a negative in something that is mostly positive. It doesn't make sense to me. Sure, some negatives MIGHT happen, but are you really trying to justify not moving forward with this research because some people might use it as an excuse to be lazy? Really?

What if everyone being the weight they want gives them more self-confidence, which gives them reason to get out more? What if there's less depression? What if there are fewer people with diabetes? There's potential to have some really great effects on the population at large here.
Here's what I've been using, in addition to all the manual stuff and things like Destroy Windows 10 Spying[1]:
https://gist.github.com/LordJZ/70d463335b2b7ab06e4f
(still contains some stuff from DW10S because I started collecting snippets before it was released)

Feel free to contribute.

[1] https://github.com/Nummer/Destroy-Windows-10-Spying
I've been doing the (unpaid) solo thing for years, and I'm almost sure I'm gonna give it up now. I built Tiled Text (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tztmgCcZaM4&feature=youtu.be...) while working at a grocery store and dealing with a repetitive strain injury, and it was a miserable, awful experience. I designed and built this 'abstract visual debugger': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvfMthDInwE while my savings slowly ran out, along with my girlfriend's patience for being ignored. And I've spent a ton of time teaching myself mathematics and programming language fundamentals, and writing on new perspectives on programming tools/languages (http://westoncb.blogspot.com/2015/06/why-programming-languag...) —with no real prospects for academic recognition (to say nothing of remuneration), with my historically poor academic record.

I think for some people this is the only thing they want to do, and it works out well enough for them. I felt like that was me for a long time, but I've begun to wonder how much of this sort of dedication is motived merely by... baser qualities.

In any case: I salute you, solo programmer! —but be careful, eh? It's possible there's a simpler lifestyle that would make you happier.
Your "absurd" conclusions seem to be based on limited understanding of IPR and related facts.

1. The DVD example: if the data is under copyright and you do not own the rights, you cannot legally copy it (except for fair use etc. exceptions). The data on the DVD is an illegal copy, but it does not mean the rights holder owns the DVD itself.

2. You do not owe anyone anything for infringing a patent unless it is asserted. If it is asserted, then it's something you negotiate with the patent holder or go to court over it. It's no different from when people accidentally develop things on somebody else's land. I don't see what's absurd about that.

3. Accidental cross-pollination only ever results in negligible fractions of fields being covered with patented genes. If you look at the history of Monsanto lawsuits, each and every defendant was proven to have deliberately cross-pollinated their fields (e.g. Bowman had 80% plus of his field covered, and it was undeniably non-accidental). So the concern of having to destroy any significant part of your seed stock is purely theoretical.
So, does this mean MS has lost all their good will points earned from releasing all the open source code recently?
I would be astonished to see "below the stack" communications for anything official from Microsoft, because that takes the public conversation from "look at all these features that affect privacy" to "look at how Microsoft is TRYING TO HIDE privacy invading features."

Since MS knows that Windows communications are going to be under a microscope anyway the odds of them expecting to successfully hide the very existence of communications seem low to me, and once they're known to exist they WILL be inspected and publicized.

I'd expect the below-stack communications to be from espionage folks instead, quite frankly.
> No, you only need to worry about having a capital loss. A capital gain and the associated taxes are always going to put you ahead of the game.

You can say this same thing about any stock you hold at any time for any length of time. Which means it's not particularly relevant to the specific case of an employer issuing a stock grant.

If you get a stock grant, you need to decide if you want to hold the stock or not. If you do, then plan on keeping it for a year or more. If you don't want to hold the stock, you should sell immediately. There are few scenarios where it makes sense to sit on the stock for 6 months. You'd do much better to move the money to a long-term investment immediately. Maybe if you really believe that the stock is going to continue rising (i.e. you would ordinarily hold), but you need the cash in 6 months for a home purchase. Normal volatility in the market could easily turn that 6-month hold into a significant loss, though.

> Be that as it may, 60.4% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

This statement has no utility. Sure, 60.4% of something is better than 100% of nothing. 80% of something is better still. And 100% of the initial value in cash is better than a loss of 50% if the stock crashes.

> Having a short term capital gain is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Sure, but having a long-term capital gain is a much better thing, whether that's in the original stock or a different investment.
For me, its really the company Ashley Madison that's the most horrible out of all of this. Relationships are definitely high risk because they can seriously damage personal reputation.

To have a company simply not do their due diligence in providing reasonable protection is beyond incompetence and negligence. Its gross that they didn't even honor peoples' request to have their profiles deleted.

Hackers are gonna hack.

Cheaters are gonna cheat.

Haters are gonna hate.

But damn Ashley Madison, in such a high risk game, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?
I started in July 2012, and I worked at least 1000 hours before the end of 2012, so that counted as a calendar year in which i worked at least 1000 hours. I easily hit 1000 hours in 2013, having worked there the entire year. I hit 1000 hours approximately halfway through 2014, becoming 100% vested after about 2 years of employment.

Maybe my original post was misleading, if you can tell me what you misunderstood then I can edit it to clarify. Regardless, I assure you that I was 100% vested in mid 2014, after roughly 2 full years of employment spanning 3 calendar years.
Why not?

The point of a market is that the price signal reflects all publicly available information available at an instant in time. If more information becomes available, or if the information is uncertain and can be interpreted many ways, the price should jump around. That's what makes it an effective market.

The average person doesn't have to worry about the market - they can park their money in an index fund, buy when they have spare money, sell when they retire, and forget about the price in the intervening years.
It's cheap today, maybe not tomorrow when the panic will have worn off.
I don't know. I suggest googling your particular laptop model, or better yet, launching a recent livecd and giving it a shot.
You'd think that there wouldn't be a bunch of bots running around making stupid decisions, but there are a lot of bots that haven't been updated in some time and were put in place according to some idealized rule-based model in some esoteric area of finance that one guy came up with.

There are other reasons why stupid decisions are being made by bots.

For example, response times matter. Often you have a tradeoff between making a bad decision quickly, or a good decision more slowly. It isn't clear that being smart is worthwhile...
Don't be so quick to label all butter as unhealthy. Butter from pasture-fed dairy cows is a great source of fat-soluble vitamins, particularly vitamin K. The commodity butter you are likely to get from mainstream brands is not. As it is an animal product, what you get out of it depends a lot on what you put into it, and there is good reason why most livestock-based companies do not want to make an issue of their husbandry practices.

There is even some evidence that indicates that not only is pasture-fed butter better than trough-fed butter, but that regularly rotating the herd to a different pasture every N days is even better. But when the press talks about butter, all butter is the same.

And let's not get started on alcohol... I believe that the current story is that somewhat less than one normalized drink per day is now healthy, and that it does not even have to be red wine.

Do your vegetables have too much oxalic acid, biological contaminants, or residual farming chemicals? Is your fish farmed, or wild-caught (using slave labor)? Is this meat processed just a little bit, or so much that it is now unhealthy? Is this "pink slime" stuff okay, or not? Is this tomato bred for flavor and nutrition, or for uniformity, ease of processing, and visual appeal?

So it's not obvious. It is, in some cases, intentionally obfuscated, to protect business interests.

Most people do have a vague idea of what is healthy, and what is not. But they have no clue when it comes to subspecies, sources, processing, transport, preservation, and preparation.

I know that spinach is a supposedly healthy food. But I have no idea whether there is any significant difference between canned spinach, block-frozen spinach, or bagged fresh spinach. I don't know on an instinctual level whether it is better to sautee it in butter or to bake it in a pastry with feta cheese. I'm not sure where it comes from, or if it is a different variety than spinach grown from seed. Sure, the unhealthiest serving of spinach is probably going to be better than the healthiest serving of gummi bears, but I don't typically eat just one thing when I eat. That spinach might come with a sandwich attached to it, or salad dressing, or barbecued pork, or feta and phyllo.

So it's not always spinach versus gummi bears. Sometimes it's gyros with spanakopita versus pulled pork sandwich with side of greens. I literally have no idea which of those two lunches is healthier, or even if the same lunch plate from different restaurants will have a similar healthiness profile.

The only way I could possibly keep track would be to have a digital assistant that is able to automatically evaluate everything I might put in my mouth and give a recommendation for a healthier alternative that isn't so far from whatever it is that I want to eat that I will ignore it. If I want a burrito from Taco Bell, I might need a recommendation for a burrito from Los Cocineros Hermanos, rather than the good karma salad from Hippietown Vegan Lunchery.
It's not any harder to learn than any other language, it just takes a lot longer to learn what you need to know to get anything done in it.
There is no 'now':  Problems with simultaneity in distributed systems
I believe myself this development in APIs is just tip of the iceberg. If the software development goes like this, everything will become huge, and hard to scale, and will need lots of engineering resources.
I believe this version of the facts is the correct one. I remember reading that he had taken a Dale Carnegie class on public speaking to help him with doing that. In his own words, more or less, it didn't stop his knees from knocking his fear while he was talking, but it did help him talk anyway while his knees were knocking...
Not to mention that such a signal doesn't always come early enough to consume water before dehydration sets in, particularly during long-term physical activity (i.e. running long distances every day); if you slack off on water intake because "well I'm not thirsty right now", by the time you start feeling thirsty again, it's pretty likely that you're already dehydrated.

Really, the whole "8 bottles of water a day" thing depends on physical activity levels. A sedentary person might just need one or two glasses of water, tops. A person who's running for hours a day might easily go through several gallons.
> When a man takes a woman on a date and pays for it, it's a subtle form of "begging".

That might be what you are doing when you take a woman out on a date and pay for it, but I can assure you -- as a man who has dated (now happily married) that that is not even close to universally the case.

> When a man is forward with a woman in hopes she will like the advances it is subtle form of "taking".

That doesn't seem consistent with any reasonable definition of the word "taking", differing in kind rather than degree from anything for which that word is a good fit. Its more like offering than taking -- you are putting your desire on display in the hopes that it will get a positive response; that's not anything like "taking" anything. (Unless its in a context where there is an implicit power dynamic where the expression of interest amounts to an implied threat to take, or an implied threat to impose adverse consequences if the interest isn't fulfilled. But that's a rather special case.)
I remember something about the ground floor in the UK buildings not being "Floor 1" like it is in the United States.

Actually, that's perfectly explained with your offset vs. index terminology. In some countries, the floor number is an index within the array of floors. In others, it's an offset from the ground.
It's not even as simple as that.

Calories in/calories out works if all you're calculating is how many calories are retained.
It does not even tell you whether you will be putting on fat or not. Depending on your nutritional balance, timing of nutrient intake, hormonal balance, etc., you may be at a caloric deficit _and still put on fat_.

Having a caloric deficit doesn't mean you're losing fat. You may be losing lean tissue while increasing fat, which can still lead to weight loss, but isn't what people usually are trying to achieve. Two people with the same caloric deficit/surplus may develop very differently over time while having the same levels of physical activity and caloric intake and 'output'.
It's not that they don't consume, it's that that don't consume to the same degree of past demographics (they simply can't). That consumption would have worked its way through many hands (businesses & employees) causing a multiplier effect vs going to pay back a loan. So larger scales of student debt, aren't just larger numbers on the balance sheets, it pulls money out of the active economy.

If they can't afford to buy a property, a whole cascade of secondary 'new place' purchases don't happen.. it's a symptom of not enough circulating money at the center of society to sustain the economy.

The crash part comes when investors look at falling activity in China, and falling commodity prices as strong indicators that global demand is falling.
37% Off JavaScript Application Design
People were miraculously saved during the collapse of the bridge
> It needs 7.77 gigabytes of disk space.
The “obsolete” word processor I use to write this (Pages 2009) weighs in at 388 megabytes; the newer and dumber Pages version 5.5.3 takes up 478 Mbytes.

Binary size is, of course, a poor measure of program complexity. A solo programmer can easily leverage libraries to drive up their total weight significantly.
All of the damage has been by people making the same mistake as the person I replied to of misrepresenting the underlying causes/symptoms.

Repeating the reasons people use to justify things like:

"If we just lowered taxes"

"If we just cut the deficit"

Isn't helping. Especially when they aren't the underlying cause.
An objective fact doesn't stop being an objective fact because one can debate whether it is the most appropriate fact for the discussion.
Yeah, except in this case I believe this is a number released by the police and is likely based on evidence learned at each suicide. Notes left behind or information from people close to the now deceased, it's safe to say these two deaths have been attributed to the impact the leak had on their lives.
It's embarrassing how ignorant you are. Congrats on falling prey to fear mongering.
We need a different name for this. We're too used to "index". If the name is "Foo" then we can have fooSubString(i,j);
I don't agree that testing algoritmic skills shows 'a lack of competence in the interviewing process'. Quite the opposite, but I respect your right to have this opinion so let's leave this aside.

On the other hand though, publicly calling a company 'stupid' because one does not like the way they recruit employees is more than a punch below the belt. If I don't like someone's recruitment process I don't apply for a job with them, but don't go to Hacker News and call them 'stupid'.
It's easy to say that, since it is true after all, but you are not helping in this matter at all. You are not going to get a single fatty to lose a pound of weight by telling them: "hey! it's your fault!". Fatties know that, but that doesn't mean it will in any way make them change what they are doing.
"Now I get to show him how there is actually a cleaner 1000 line program hiding inside his 2000 line program."

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/635831064846594048
I heard of a guy who made a lot of money in the stock market. Somebody asked him how he did it. He said, "I always sold too soon."

Don't kick yourself for getting out a year early. It's way better than half a year too late.

However:

> the US government can't even sell bonds, it's selling them to itself with the Fed fabricating money to buy them.

That part is over, and has been for months. And yet US bond prices are still only at 2%. I've been watching that number pretty closely - US bond auctions failing would be a huge red light for me. But even without the Fed as a buyer, the US government is having very little trouble selling bonds at top prices.
Consent is cemented 72 hours after a contract has been agreed-upon, unless fraud is involved. In this case, agreement to future contract amendments/changes is consent.

Your fault for clicking "Agree". Didn't anyone watch the Human Cent-iPad episode of South Park?
Intelligent Energy's Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology Can Now Fit Inside an iPhone
Palmyra's Baalshamin temple blown up
Check out : https://benchmarks.cisecurity.org/downloads/multiform/

They call them 'benchmarks', but they are really just checklists of things to do (disable X, lock down Y, etc.)
Where are the security researchers? Credible, elaborate, and well-documented articles? Has this not captured their attention or is it a lack of concern?
The birthday analogy is a good one, I'll have to keep that in mind. Your actual "birthday" being the points between year elements, your "age" as the offset from birth.

As to the point about floor numbering, the situation can be a little confusing in Canada. Some buildings label in the US style, labeling stories [1st, 2nd, 3rd] while others label in the UK style as [Ground, 1st, 2nd]. We also often mix them and you'll see [Ground, 2nd, 3rd], with ground sometimes replaced by main, or lobby.