skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll delegate to Jon Stewart on this one:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/18/1202810/-Jon-Stewar...

[video clip] FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY UNDERSECRETARY ASA HUTCHINSON (4/16/2013): It's important because we as a nation have to get this right. I look back at history to the time during World War II, that we interned some Japanese-Americans. At the time, it seemed like the right and proper thing to do. But in the light of history, it was an error.

JON STEWART: I'm sorry, just excuse me for a second, I just need to check something real quick. I just need to.... (takes out cell phone and dials a number)

----

GEORGE TAKEI: Hello, Jon.

JON STEWART: Hey! Hey, is this George Takei?

GEORGE TAKEI: Hi, how are you?

JON STEWART: I'm very well, sir. How are you?

GEORGE TAKEI: Just great.

(audience cheering)

JON STEWART: It's Jon Stewart. I have a quick question for you. When you were four years old, and your family were taken from your home and placed in an internment camp for Japanese-Americans — at the time, did that seem like the right and proper thing to do?

GEORGE TAKEI: No! It did not.

(audience laughter)

JON STEWART: OK, thanks a lot, George.

GEORGE TAKEI: Anytime, Jon.

JON STEWART: All right, bye-bye.

----

(audience cheering and applause)

JON STEWART: Yeah, that's what I thought! See, the thing about a moral compass is, if you take it out and check it from time to time, you don't have to wait for history to tell you you're facing the wrong direction.
I think there is a pretty obvious explanation why the Jews in Warsaw fought back but the French mostly didn't. See the first chart on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_victims

Most likely an airdrop of arms would have ended the Rwandan genocide sooner - keep in mind that the genocide only ended when armed Tutsis took over the country. This effort was certainly helped by the fact that fleeing Tutsis, formerly hoping to just quietly live their lives and ignore politics, suddenly became willing to take up arms and join the RPF.
Is this a surprise to anyone? Capitalism is productive for the society in a strong democratic environment. When capitalist economy unites with authoritarian regimes, you get Godwined pretty fast and IRL.
No. Disagree with the first part. At least where I live girls have had an advantage all the way through school at least since I was a kid which means at least more than two decades.
People seem to be assuming that free market capitalism means companies are perfectly happy about competition, because competition is what we expect to see under perfect free market conditions. No, companies do not like competition; any sane (not to mention rational) actor in such a system will do anything it can to ensure its own monopoly. Pitting various actors with such tendencies against each other is kind of the core idea of market economy. It's pretty obvious that some actors will temporarily get ahead, and then capitalize on that to get further ahead. Hence inequality, centralization and TPP, which is another stepping stone towards companies being in charge of governments, and not the other way around.

As for unemployment, there are many things that give rise to it, but part of it is definitely market optimizing things so much that people are being pushed under minimum survivable wage and have to rely on (the bad, communist) welfare to survive. Automation is playing a serious role here, even companies know that (hence the "don't vote for increased minimum wage, or we'll have no choice but to replace our workers with robots" ads that started to appear).
Pretty much confirmed. The Quebec federation of maple syrup is hiring security guards in some regions close to the border to ensure the quota system is respected by everyone (and not exported "illegally")

Article here (in French)
http://www.lapresse.ca/la-tribune/estrie-et-regions/201504/0...
>> any feel that modern materialism is a cheap and disappointing answer to the question of what is really actually going on in the universe, the sum total of everything that is and will be.

And these many have no better answer, in fact all they ever, ever have is some handwaving about feelings and a dietary supplement to sell you.
The "current trend" (although this is by no means new) isn't about insults per se. It doesn't really matter if someone is insulted.
I never understood how inverting a statement and adding the "fixed that for you" meme is adding any value to other readers.
Of course, they are consequences of today's corporate capitalism!

To have a shiny vision of capitalism, that just is not compatible with reality, does not help. Communism's failure was not, that it was not a nice idea, it's failure was, that it's thoughts where not compatible with reality!

Reality is, that international corporations have huge stacks of money and plenty of lawyers and lobbyists. And they use it for the only ethics they got: profits.

And TTP, inequality, centralization, unemployment ... are results of the thrive to more and more profits for the owning people at the expense of the working people.

Today's capitalism is shaped by the profit motive -- and the profit motive has no morals and no ethics.

And when you talk about "free market" -- there is no such thing. A real free market would give everybody the same chance. But the situation today is, that the big corporations are shaping the laws and the small players can not. So there is no such thing as a free market with free and equal competition in reality.
> This particular post-mortem by Stripe makes me trust them less as it's a fairly simple mistake that shouldn't have been made.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I don't think its going to hurt their business at all.
Our Robot Sky
Like everyone here has already mentioned: knowledge and practice.

Knowledge of cooking was passed down from generation to generation via schools, guilds and families. We stand on the shoulders of giants. Thousands of years of trial and error passed down. People measure by sight, sound, touch and smell. For example, there are multiple ways to guess steak doneness. Simmering is visually different from boiling which is different from a rolling boil. If you're frying something in a pan, you can guess the temperature by sound. If you're making a stew or braise, it's done when the meat breaks apart. Doesn't matter what the cookbook says about exact times because environment and cooking equipment is different for everybody. Water boils before 100 C at high elevation. I moved to an area with high humidity in the summers and all my baking recipes from home failed.

With practice, you also build an intuitive sense of doneness. For example, I've cooked enough "black on the outside, raw on the inside" chicken to know how hot the heat should be and how long it should take--even without a thermometer or a timer. Like others have mentioned, sometimes you just have to cook a proxy item or sacrifice a piece.

One of the big differences between new cooks, and experienced cooks is that people who have cooked for a while are constantly tasting, touching and inspecting their food. New cooks tend to follow recipes word for word and only taste at the end. Then they get surprised when something is under/over cooked and under/over seasoned.

Lastly, I think previous generations had different expectations of consistency and quality. Modern society is hyper-precise. Traditional recipes have a huge margin for error.
Care to reveal what planet you're from, or is there a reason you're coy about it?
Global Inequality: Is it getting better or worse? (2013)
> "Some guy just start talking to me while I'm doing something."

Have you tried the headphones trick? Works for me. You don't even have to be listening to music.

> "Interacting has become a standard."

Without putting too fine a point on it, it's always been the standard. You only exist now because your predecessors interacted. I hear you that there's a time and place for interaction, and you shouldn't feel pressured into engaging with others, and it's good to enjoy your own company, I frequently find that's what I enjoy the most too. However, if you label yourself as 'introvert' or 'extrovert' you limit your potential experiences, and I don't see the point in that.
Because I'm not making money off of her.

"The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more."

To summarize your post: I subscribe to the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics, but don't call it that!

I have no moral objection to prostitution. I also have no moral objection to "I'll give you money everyday for cleaning my house" to a poor person who hates cleaning.
You won't see many planes in 1950, and TV was unheard of on most of the planet. Change comes with different pace to various places of the world.

But yes, we're mostly catching up, not leaping forward.
No idea if they knew about this at the time, but you could take the tree ring widths and correlate them with historical records from nearby forests.
As an active PM, I can't really spot anything that would make any of these points irrelevant today. One thing I did note, though, is that PM concept is not so widespread as one may think. Dilution of power in large functional organizations often means that such a "small CEO" is not necessarily welcomed.
This is why some corporations should be forcefully converted to benefit corporations which have more stakeholders than profit alone. Big Pharma, Insurance, and Utilities should be converted first.
> They will no doubt be impressed with miniaturization as an evolutionary spectacle

They might also take note of how difficult these devices are to repair
Correlation that has stuck with me for 15 years. An acquaintance of mine stated years ago, when we were in our late 20's, that she was put on SSRIs from 13-17 years old and had absolutely no memories of those years. No recall of her teen years, whatsoever. That struck me as incredibly tragic.

Around the same time another friend was taking a smoking-cessation drug that induced very graphic vusuals of dismembering various family members... but I digress.
Yes, that seems to be quite common, although mostly isn't fatal.
To give you another example, then: Pre-Apartheid, Mahatma Ghandi campaigned for improved rights for Indians. Only. He explicitly did not support giving blacks the same rights he wanted for Indians, and explicitly accepted continued white supremacy. Indians in South Africa at the time were an oppressed group, with substantially curtailed rights - they were by no means part of the "majority establishment".

I am sympathetic to threat expressions by oppressed groups with more leniency, but trying to redefine racism to avoid labelling it as such I find extremely offensive - it does not just affect the "majority establishment", but also other minority groups.
"Scientist who is an expert on X opines on Y and Z."
I was unaware of the potential political implications of this article. I'd probably not have submitted had I known that.

I'm not following the election horserace, this was just an interesting historical article that came up in my feed.
No, that's not at all acceptable to move the goalpost in that way at all! How completely and utterly ridiculous!
Thanks for the spoiler! Do you really think there's anyone here on Hacker News who wouldn't get the joke without needing you to explain it to them?

The point the song makes is relevant to the conversation, and the song's well worth listening to even after you spoiled the surprise, if not just for Tim's facial expressions.

I posted the link because I believe his humor is a relevant path to enlightenment, not just an end to itself.
This argument in no way provides any kind of reason for defining away non-institutional racism.
Everything has unfortunate connotations in some context. If I wanted I could come up with a number of reasons to feel insulted but that's not my thing.
>I think the point of that advice is to remind that for an astounding amount of people empathy is not at all a priority!

I certainly agree with that; I personally put effort into appearing less empathetic and less respectful than I normally am when I'm trying to get a job, just because I am more likely to get the job when I do that; my theory is that it matches most people's heuristics for "confidence"

(I mean, there is a cost... I'd prefer to work at a place that didn't value "confidence" - but not as strongly as I prefer to work.)

But yeah. I'm pretty sure people who are interviewing have no real interest in empathy or diversity. Hell, listen to just about anyone talk about "cultural fit" - everyone has an idea of what their new employee should look like, and there's not a lot of diversity (either in the 'inclusive of protected classes' sense or the "diversity of thought" sense) in that idea.
I guess we should try and move away from labels a little bit - because a lot of time is spent discussing whether communism is true communism, or if what we have is capitalism, corporationism, corporate state capitalism or whatever.

Name it however you like, it doesn't change that there are processes you mentioned that bring about the results we don't like. We need to focus on those.

> Today's capitalism is shaped by the profit motive -- and the profit motive has no morals and no ethics.

In a way, our economy is a paperclip maximizer. It doesn't love or hate you, but you're an expendable resource that can be used to make something else (profit within the system).
Obviously, companies want less competition, but if they use a political system to do that, it's not free market capitalism.
Er, n=1

[ The title ought to read:

"For what n does n! have n decimal digits?..." ]
Push / Pop modal SFSafariViewController (Hacking swipe from edge gesture)
Glad to see some sort of scientific study on this. Too much of the debate is based on ideology and hearsay, not systematic study.

Colorado sets aside a quarter of its pot taxes for scientific study. Fed funding sources generally ban or highly restrict such studies. So we dont have good modern evidence for the claimed benefits or harms of drugs.
Scala developers needed
we are looking for scala developers as contractors for 2 months... here are the details for the work in hand

The workload entails developing analytical tools using Hadoop, spark, using play framework with Scala language
The work includes using spark streaming and machine learning libraries

on top of that, resource should be fully aware of DevOps toolchain and source control management (dev, deploy, launch, release) with needed automation scripts.
> A free and fair market is not bad per se…

Such a market is not obvious to set up. Take the internet for instance. There are several ways to get a free markets, some of which lead to healthy competition between many many providers, and some of which lead to near-monopoly.

Basically, it all starts at the handling of the last mile. There are many last miles to cover, and it doesn't make technical sense to duplicate them. So, one solution is have the state build the lines, then lease them to providers at regulated rates that allow small providers (10-100 subscribers) to use them at rates no worse than the big boys. That solution tends to lead to the "free and fair" market you seek.

Another solution would be to minimise state intervention (because "free market"), and thus let providers build their own last miles —and lease them if they want to. The result? A local monopoly at worst, and an oligopoly at best.

Free markets require a proper set-up. That means prior intervention —by the state if need be.
> Permission from one of several founders at a 10 person company is proportionally equivalent to letting your team lead know you'll be absent. That's not exactly an excessive standard, is it?

Requesting is different from informing. "May I work from home tomorrow?" is not the same as "I am going to work from home tomorrow."
I would agree. The current trend (at least in Europe) is the other direction. In Europe we want to privatize more and more Utilities and other institutions that belonged to the public sector. Schools, water, electricity ...
I poked around a bit to learn more and found their ESPY award clip. It's touching, too, and provides a bit more context also.

Pt1 of 2 (Part 2 is next in the playlist): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNe5uxccDj4
Are you so sure about that? Capitalism is at its core about the (private) accumulation of capital in the sense of means of production. This capital is used by human labour to produce things. Technological change is ultimately a process by which the ratio of capital input to human labour input increases.[0]

In a sense, robots (automated machines) are the perfection of capital, where the ratio becomes arbitrarily high: human labour becomes decreasingly needed until it's basically unnecessary.

Private ownership of this capital - which is what capitalism is all about - is then absolutely the problem, because it pits a small group of capital owners against a majority which depends on the products produced by that capital without having anything useful to trade left.

[0] How you measure this ratio is an important but difficult topic, and in fact one must be careful not to let an implicit definition of measures frame the discussion.
3.1.x is a development branch and not intended for production use. When they release 3.2, MongoDB will support it.
The Two Sacageweas
There were active resistances in most occupied countries including France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Resistance

However a big difference between occupied populations and Jews is that Germany for the most part left the occupied population alone.
Yes they were still oppressed and in many cases fell into poverty however they weren't hunted down by the SS, gathered and then shipped to concentration camps, ghettos, and later to extermination camps.

As far as Ghettos go then for the most part it was a "Polish" issue, there weren't many Ghettos outside of Poland, while it appears now that the German population knew much more about the treatment of Jews than what previously thought or admitted the German's kept Germany clean, and only had labor and work camps within Germany and for the most part France and other occupied countries which sadly provided much better conditions for the most part which enabled the Germans to dismiss the claims of what was happening in Poland and in the eastern front as Jewish and later Allied propaganda.

And this is a major issue, while French, Polish, Danish, Dutch and other nationalities had resistances they for the most part were fighting for ideals and their personal freedom. A population in risk of genocide has to literally fight for it's life. If Jews the capabilities of supporting a continuous armed resistance the Holocaust could've been avoided (this isn't claiming that the end result would've resulted in less deaths) because it would be much less likely that the Germans could've as easily transported as many Jews at that much of an ease during the final solution.

The final solution was so unthinkable that even the Jews didn't believe it until the news broke out in the final year of the war in Europe, the majority of the Jews were transported from ghettos and work camps and thought that they are just are being put into a new camp, the level of deception that was put into the final solution was truly unbelievable including letting the "red-cross" (still no clear if this was a show or the actual red-cross) visit the Jews in the big Ghettos before transferring them to the death camps to further pacify and calm down the population.

So yes arming at risk populations might make a huge difference in the end even if you only consider that difference to be the way they died rather than the pure numbers, but in modern times it's also an issue. Tribal genocide (which sadly being going since even before colonial times) cannot be just as easily compared to the Holocaust, if you are the population too much you might still get a Genocide in which the original at risk population isn't the victim but now the perpetrator so you end up with constantly fueling an ever shifting conflict.
And if they use private guns for hire to do it?
The most pessimistic climate change scientist has had a sudden change of heart
The results all talk about tests that measure levels in the urine or blood, not the level in the brain, sorry if I'm being thick, but I don't see any actually measure brain levels.
> I don't know that anyone is claiming any expertise at all - this is just how things get emphasized and repeated online.

So he probably just didn't answer smart enough to not get exploited for a political agenda.

I feel sorry for him since Hawking the physicist is probably much more enjoyable for the greater public than Hawking the armchair economist.
The line dividing "market" and "political system" is blurry and pretty arbitrary, like most lines in models we make. There's nothing in reality that makes meddling with politics unkosher; if it increases profit, then the incentives created by the economy will make companies choose to do so. The problem isn't that they're crossing some arbitrary lines - the problem is with the incentives that lead them to it.
Yup, it's sort of a response to Ben Carson, who also got a more directed rebuttal: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/123080/ben-carson-wrong-a...
I would rather for the sake of low income people have the electricity charged with a tax. Paying it at registration time or on any other payment schedule is a pain and can be seen at how many people let their tags lapse.

Why do people believe you cannot put a use tax on the electricity?
The implication here is that an armed American population would be able to defeat a tyrannical US government.

This is the same US government that's armed with nuclear weapons, tanks with composite armor, a hacker network that would make Google blush, and populist democratic backing.

Additionally, this is the same US government has killed over 600,000 of its own citizens before for rebelling.

It is the height of sociopathic narcissism to think individuals or small bands of "freedom fighters" would be able to defeat such a system.

Smart people would instead work WITH the system to achieve their objectives, instead of working against it like a buffoon.

Personal firearms should be removed throughout a modern society.
None of the issues you outline are racial issues.

Feel free to call a system racist; I'll likely agree depending on the merits of your argument. But people that hate others due to their race are racist, no matter how you couch the issue.

The conflict and resentment that people feel when they are accused of being racist due to only their race works counter to the cause of solving problems, not towards resolution. It encourages in-group/out-group mentalities on both sides and is unproductive toward the goal of equality. When you say that one class of person engaging in the same act as another is different because of their race, you are saying "we will never be equal."
Please keep this civil.

I grew up somewhere in western Europe. Girls got(, and still get get) extra points when applying to schools there.

This is not limited to subjects that have a overrepresentation of boys, it is like this at chemistry and nursery studies as well.
It's probably a flaw of public attention that fame isn't linked to the field it is gained in.
Of course established companies do not like competition, it is the startups that do. If we didn't have free markets, then MS would not have risen up to replace IBM (for example; maybe not the best example). What we hope is that MS is better at doing what IBM used to do.