skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So I hear what you're saying, but if that's the case then everyone, everywhere acts irrationally all the time. Because nobody is an oracle who knows how everything will play out. Is that the point that you're trying to make? Nobody has perfect information.

I guess what I was trying to describe is that people might act foolishly, but they don't know it's foolish. And most of the time we only know it's foolish in hindsight. At the time it might have been brilliant, but they went broke so it wasn't. If they'd made billions, it would have been genius.

So basically most people have "facts" that they believe to be true, and use them to make decisions that in light of those "facts" are smart. Few people disregard all facts and reasons and just do whatever, or do something counter to what their facts tell them.

What I'm describing might not be the economics definition of rationality, but it's closely tied to the colloquial definition and the idea that pops into my head when someone says "rational".
It seems OK, but it would have been better if it was made by someone with more familiarity and experience with the language.
Isn't Hola the company that sells "stressing" services using their network, aka DDOS attacks?
why can't I downvote this!!! erhhhh
Much appreciated, I'm definitely saving this!
Build your own SalesStack for Startups
They didn't know of the effects the bomb would have on the hibakusha.

As far as I can tell, it's the severe discrimination they received at the hands of their countrymen that was/is their biggest problem, e.g. as Wikipedia puts it, "The government of Japan recognizes about 1% of these as having illnesses caused by radiation."

The physical injuries we inflicted with the atomic bombings were on a par with our systematic firebombings of their cities, especially when everything came together and a firestorm developed, like in the first firebombing of Tokyo that killed 100,000, and Hiroshima.
I am glad that you have made a conscious decision about what is important to you.

It took me about two years of work in a commercial environment to actually internalise this and realise I much preferred working 40 hour weeks and freeing up more of my time to enjoy an equal relationship that was not polluted by the involvement of money.

I am at the point now where I think my "passion" for programming has been destroyed by work, and I think I am happier for it. I am still very willing to negotiate and participate in trades where I exchange valuable programming in return for money. Working 40 hours a week for $1.5x in an environment where everyone goes home by 5:30pm seems more promising than working 55 hours a week for $1.0x where employees are starting to fall apart.
My tip for getting under their skin: sincerely try to persuade them that they deserve a better job than the shitty, exploitative thing they're going. They are prepared for yelling, but not so prepared for compassion and honesty.

They'll just hang up as soon as they know you aren't a mark. I've tried everything, with these folks.
I'm not quite sure how to interpret the output as it doesn't render particularly kindly in my terminal:

sub MAIN($s) {
say "{$s.chars}: $s";
my $b = $s.substr(0,12);
say "{$b.chars}: $b";
}

$ perl6 hn-test2.p6 देवनागरीदेवनागरी
16: देवनागरीदेवनागरी
12: देवनागरीदेवन
If it said that explicitly, I'd be fine with it.

But given the last paragraph, I don't think that's the most likely interpretation.

And it's still a terrible way to judge languages without a lot more context. All langauges have gotchas that fit into 3-5 lines. Python's got a pretty decent set: https://www.google.com/search?q=python%20gotchas It's still a good language.

And let me be very clear: I'm not "defending" Go here... I quite like both Python and Go. I've got no trouble saying Python is incrementally easier than Go when it comes to dealing with strings (but both are beat by Perl). (Especially since the incremental advantage comes at a stiff performance price. Sometimes that's fine, sometimes that's not.) I'm specifically saying as computer language polyglot, this metric for measuring languages is terrible. It's a rationalization, not a rational argument.
The Growing Role of Software in Chips
CERT warns of hard-coded credentials in home routers
I don't know OP's country of residence, but I believe Vanguard mutual funds are not available in the US - they're not available in Canada at least. Even if one has access to the Vanguard retirement funds, it's still useful to understand why a portfolio works over the long term (or not). This can be particularly useful when the markets plunge, as they did very recently.

I've read both Four Pillars and Random Walk; I refer back to the former much more often than the latter. But both are great books.
Not necessarily a bad thing.

You have junky companies like Amazon, for example, on a decade long binge of expansion, whose plans depend on cheap access to capital. Their only way to deliver profit is by achieving near monopoly status. Why are we subsidizing that behavior?

We have a government on a spending binge, again fueled by cheap access to capital. How is slowing down that train a bad thing?

If you look back historically, we have had plenty of boom cycles without the "record low" rates. It's not the end of the world as we know it.
The Moon landing was a giant leap. The next leap is staying there
You need to take news reporting with a grain of salt, just because all news papers say something doesn't mean that something is true.

There is some truth in lower Yuan helps export, and the Chinese government probably kept that in mind. But I think their main priority is to maintain the status quo, and keep things stable, for the past 15 years or so.
>I think human skills remain important in order to figure out what the customer wants.

I'd be careful with that one, the greatest value in Google and Facebook analytics are just that.
Isn't that against their goal of making the Yuan part of the Special drawing rights? If there are fewer Yuan internationally (and more in-country) they have a worse case for that.
Right. American troops even sang Kumbaya in Vietnam. Napalm, agent orange cough cough. Remind me again which country has dropped the most amount of explosives in other countries and how does that measure up with the second highest.
Nice, impressive.
> I am not trying to be disrespectful to you, but I think you are being far to charitable in your interpretation of the conduct of your peers in the Haskell community.

This is probably where the disconnect lies. It seems like boothead is operating under the principle of charity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity). HN's guidelines don't specifically mention it but seem like they have this principle in mind. You have absolutely no evidence that dons actually "marshaled his supporters to spam" and accusations that he did are not very charitable (as you yourself admit). It's just as likely that some people got really excited about it and posted it to HN.
The only gendered words used are in a quote. Surely you're not suggesting that we change other people's words, are you?
The intercepts collected by the Allies on the internal debates of some of the Japanese, and the internal debates the US decision makers had over whether to opt for unconditional surrender or something believed to be more likely to be accepted are pretty well documented by this reasonably neutral source: http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/
Why is uBlock somewhat frowned upon here on HN? From what I've seen published it's still a good solution - works well for me. I thought the original developer gave up the project and was being rather difficult about the whole thing.
One thing it seems most of the comments replying to are missing is that women are trained, in the US, to be "nice", emotionally observant, and socially fluent. Even throwing innate differences to the wind, watch family interactions and see four-year-old Lucy get reprimanded for not hugging Grandma and four-year-old Lionel not hugging Grandma and everyone laughing and saying, "How cute, little man!" and giving him an out (a wave, a handshake). Through the power of social ostracism women have learned to act nice and be emotionally observant even when they don't feel it.

Guys have their own pressures, of course, starting with the basic "don't cry" and "man up" and going from there. Imagine Lucy and Lionel scraping up their knees mildly on a rock: Lucy will get a lot of cuddles and hugs when she cries, and Lionel will be treated rather differently -- a range of responses from a briefer hug to "You're fine!" This definitely influences peoples' ideas of appropriate interpersonal interactions.
Pixar in a Box – Khan Academy
VODER: A speech synthesizer from 1939 [video]
Thanks for the extra reddit link which was definitely more in layman terms.
Doesn't the C version have a serious bug? If the input string has 12 or more characters, the destination string will not be zero-terminated.

From the strncpy docs:

"No null-character is implicitly appended at the end of destination if source is longer than num. Thus, in this case, destination shall not be considered a null terminated C string (reading it as such would overflow)."
No they don't, tons of retail investors actively trade.
But who has the information they need to know what is in their best interest?
End of the World Planning
Yields rise, and the US government must now service a higher level of debt, pushing the deficit higher. US is forced to re balance spending, stifling growth and economic activity in order to keep debt in line.

I'm not sure how this causes yields to rise. The short term interest rate is determined by the FED. If China sells off enough treasuries that the interest rate on them jumps to 1.0% then the FED will probably just buy more treasuries until the interest rate hits the zero lower bound again at 0% interest. This would stimulate the economy.
China cannot just set the exchange rate arbitrarily, well, without creating huge artificial imbalances that even they can't get away with. Instead, they make their peg real by buying/selling RMB and dollars. So if china wants to prevent the RMB from tanking (and believe me, they do) they need to buy satisfy the demand for dollars bought buy exchanging RMB, just like they buy dollars to provide dollars. China bought treasuries in the first place to park USD from trade surpluses somewhere that wouldn't cause their currency to appreciate, and now they are selling that to prevent depreciation. Balance must be maintained, one way or the other.
This is a question of semantics - one that everyday users don't care about. To them, unauthenticated is insecure.
I would be very, very wary of a statement like "we wish to eliminate only those social biases that increase power inequality".

Yes, there untrue and unfair biases that increase power inequality, and those should be eliminated.

But what about preferences which, after careful deliberation, turn out to be actually objective to the best of our knowledge? If I understand your statements correctly, then they would imply that in this case, the if that bias/belief/preference/opinion would benefit the socially dominant group (thus increase power inequality), then then it should be eliminated; and if/when that same bias would benefit the socially disadvantaged group (this increasing power equality) then the exact same thing should be praised... which feels not okay to me.

I mean, people are different, and groups of people are also pretty different. For pretty much any useful property, when we split people in groups (e.g. by genders, by ager, or "all the current USA citizens with X ethnical background") we see examples where one of the group will have (on average) a significant objective advantage over another group in that property. Most likely it's not because of something they did or deserve, it's some effect of past generations of socioeconomic situations, ingrained cultural practices that favoured different attitudes to e.g. directions of education, or simple genetics - but there differences are real.

If you would achieve perfect equality of opportunity for each individual - you would still have a significant inequality of results and power between such groups.

If you would achieve perfect equality of results or power equality - that could only be done through very significant inequality of opportunities for individuals, significantly aiding or hampering them depending on which social groups they belong to. This does not seem acceptable to me at all; the goal is nice, but it definitely doesn't justify such (IMHO horrible) means.
A retail investor is someone investing his own money.
>cause a drop in the stock market, as more cautious investors (retirees, etc), enticed by increased yields, reduce their stock market exposure

You've committed a fallacy: the overall stock market exposure cannot be reduced because those more cautious investors, moving their dollars to treasuries, have to sell the stock to someone else.
Was able to find a video of the fight discussed in the article:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXgE2SZBaUE
Nothing wrong with an app making money. It's all in the method.
> No, it assumes that agents use all available information optimally.

No, it is defined to include perfect information; actors using all available information optimally within the limits of their cognitive ability and considering, also, the opportunity cost of devoting resources to informationa evaluation and decision-making is a weaker alternative ("bounded rationality") to pure rationality.
No, it merely assumes one byte per character. For example, it would work correctly in Latin-1 or EBCDIC.

In any case, the problem statement (though it's a bit vague) requires building a truncated string, not just printing it.
I've only been in the Tamaulipas state, but driving there, people would drive on the shoulder leaving the center of the road open so you could pass that way. A two lane road often turned into a 4 lane road with some butthole puckering.
What is your forum software bringing compared to Discourse ?

I actually hate Discourse, for me, this is not the way a forum should be, and from my quick glance at your website, it seems that you go in a very similar direction (which makes me sad :( )
Traders are investors with shorter time horizons; they are not different animals. Buying a stock because you think the company is a good value and will grow over time is not different than buying a stock because you think it's going to have positive earnings out tomorrow and the price is going to bounce; both buyers are investors and both are trading, simply on different time horizons.
The estimate for the overall deaths in the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere were 250,000 per month, we'd only liberated the Philippines from it. Korea, which had been under their boot for half a century, Malaya as it was called back then, the populous Dutch East Indies, now Indonesia, South East Asia, they had captured a lot of territory and people, all of whom they viewed as untermenschen.
As it currently stands I don't think there's any guarantee that your stop-loss will sell at the price you've set anyway, rather than 10% or 20% or even more below it. The only difference is that right now it could cause all your shares to be sold for less than you expected because of a temporary market blip that lasted seconds.
Mombasa, Kenya: CloudFlare's 43rd data center
Interesting idea ... ton of potential, both for the application and the technology. For now a good little time waster.
One question, what kind of data is being used for the fingerprint generation? Because, it is sometimes inconsistent with what is expected (checkout Boston Dynamics) (or may be TIL that BD concentrates more on social network than robotics).
Anyway, thumbs-up
Go is frequently presented as a replacement of Python. When people hear that, it sets up an expectation that Go will have the same pleasant qualities of Python, when it doesn't, any more than Python has goroutines.
Ask HN: Population by postal code in Germany?
Been digging on the official German statistics page but can't seem to find anything. Would someone know where else I can get that kind of information?

Thanks!
Show HN: Not on AshleyMadison?Cool,check out your friends are on Ashley Madison
Hmm, are you referring to something very specific? The contrast ratio is incredibly high (black text on white background). The navigation bar has terrible contrast but that's all I saw.
Well said, but my opinion is that you should move away from thinking that success is a "positive performance review".

I've found that "work hard" and "do your best" work well in combination with the other two thoughts, not so much on their own. It's a package.
Even a small difference in the mean or sd for a given attribute will result in enormous gender imbalances for jobs requiring an extreme value of that attribute.

If you select people totally at random (no discrimination!) from the population of people with >130 IQ to work at Facebook and the sd for men in the general population is 11 IQ points instead of 10 for women, you'll wind up with a 70% male workforce at Facebook.

Similarly if men had a mean IQ of 101 instead of 99 for women, Facebook would have a 66% male workforce.

From R:

women <- pnorm(130, mean = 100, sd = 10, lower.tail = FALSE)

men <- pnorm(130, mean = 100, sd = 11, lower.tail = FALSE)

scaling <- 100/(women+men)

men * scaling

[1] 70.28561

women * scaling

[1] 29.71439

women <- pnorm(130, mean = 99, sd = 10, lower.tail = FALSE)

men <- pnorm(130, mean = 101, sd = 10, lower.tail = FALSE)

scaling <- 100/(women+men)

men * scaling

[1] 65.8503

women * scaling

[1] 34.1497
New Experiment Closes Quantum Loopholes, Confirms Spookiness
Also called the human predicament.
Stops aren't for investors, so "tracking the market" isn't relevant here. Investors get their returns primarily from dividends and possibly (based on luck) from buying low and selling high, on the rare occasions they sell. Traders get their returns primarily from buying low and selling high at a later time as well as other strategies such as various forms of arbitrage. Trading is itself a business, and as such a trader's returns do not track an index any more than a single arbitrary company's profits do.

A trader will usually have many positions open, and successful traders have a plan for every position. Stops are one tool that a trader can use to execute that plan, usually to cut their losses on one of the many trades that they know will go against them. A loss on a particular position is not a disaster and every trade's plan accounts for the possibility of having to exit with a loss. This is much more important to traders than investors because traders make or lose money based on the behavior of the market; investors make or lose money based on the success or failure of the underlying businesses they own, so buying or selling an asset based on market behavior is not appropriate.

Traders are well aware of the risks of using stops: information leakage (stop-hunters), exposure to bad data, and bouts of illiquidity. Some of those risks can be mitigated by using stop-limit orders instead of the normal stop-market type, but not all, and stop-limit orders carry the risk of accumulating additional losses without exiting. Everyone knows all of these things; there are no surprises. Weep not for the unfortunate trader. He knows it's just part of the business.
They behave rationally... the issue, more than informational assymmetry that you note, is that they're facing Newcomb-like problems: They're betting on what other people are going to bet on what they're going to bet on what other people are going to bet...
And they're all trying to do it faster than the average participant, in order to attain advantage.

Stocks aren't traded on some fundamental objective functions of accounting value and projected profits, they're traded purely on what people believe that other other people will be paying for the stock five milliseconds / five minutes / five days / five years from now. All at once, in a recursive mess. The professed theory is that some kind of objective truth underlies all this, and eventually generates some theory of value that all the speculators can latch on to - but that sort of investing is a tiny fraction of trading volume.
Fine. Change "unresponsive to input" to "unresponsive to all but a very restricted subset of all possible inputs".
He proposed a scientific approach to finding the differences. The search for truth was rejected.

veritas indeed.
I thought rationality was a measure of how one's actions are based on what you know, but not the things you don't know.

Prior to finding out that the NSA was wiretapping all the things, it might be considered irrational to expect them to intercept and store all of your information. Now that we know that, it would be irrational NOT to think that. The truth in both cases is the same: the NSA has been carbon copied on all of our packets for ages, the only difference is that now we know it's true (and not a "conspiracy theory").
Just a quick note to say that jdh hasn't been an active OCaml user for years. He trolls on behalf of F# these days.
There are at least three major flaws in the 7-line C program, even ignoring character set issues. (main returns int, argv[1] can be null, and strncpy doesn't always null-terminate the target). If you're going to compare languages, you should find someone who knows each of them well.
The centeral problem with that line of thinking is it's really hard to both set aside "social biases" and it's really hard to seperate what's useful for getting a job done and how we currently measure thinks. Consider, in an 100% egalitarian society the NBA might end up with 1-5 women. However, a similar game in an egalitarian society might be much closer to 50-50 if the rules focused on slightly different gameplay. Ex: does making the basket 5% higher change the gender balance.

Granted, the NBA is entertainment which complicates things, but the same line of thinking probably applies to the Navy Seals. IMO, whenever you see a biased rule you need to deside if it's useful before you can view it as egalitarian.
> If it must always use the ICE, it just has an electric transmission rather than a mechanical one.

I would respectfully disagree. When an engine is asked for WOT most of the time they throw fuel economy to the wind and give it max power bar none. You might spend 50% more fuel for 10% more power versus 90% throttle.

If you have a 3kWh battery bank then you can eliminate this really wasteful special case and use the batteries as very, very short term power source to get the vehicle up to speed quickly. 3kWh discharged in 3 minutes is 60kW which is an extra 50-75HP depending on your driveline efficiency. And then when you're not flooring it you can run the engine a bit harder and quickly recharge the battery bank for the next surge.

Just because you're not running off of batteries for an hour doesn't make it not a hybrid. If you use the batteries for even just 10-15 seconds in particularly fuel-wasteful engine conditions to eliminate them, that totally qualifies as hybrid.
It doesn't differ from checking the domain name in the certificate. It does differ from checking the entity in the EV certificate, which is generally the legal name of the company.

In theory, a phisher could register a company with a similar name to the target website's legal name, obtain a valid EV certificate for that, and then phish using a similar looking domain with a similar looking EV certificate legal name. In practice, if that were to begin happening, I'd like to think that the authorities in charge of legal entity registration (eg. Companies House in the UK) would start requiring identity checks for the legal entity registrations, and then phishers would not have an easy path to exploit this route.