skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So numbers from the article: Dell went private in 2013, valuing itself at $23B. EMC has a market cap of $53.6B (Dell would have to pay some sort of premium on this). Dell is raising $40B in debt to finance the purchase.

Let's say Dell pays a 20% premium on EMC and buys it for ~$65B. Let's also say that Dell's market cap has increased somewhat since 2013, since the market has generally been a bull market. Let's say that their $25B valuation is now $30B.

So the companies combined have a valuation of $95B, with $40B in debt. They both seem like high cash flow, low margin businesses. I'm very curious to see the manner in which (by which I mean the degree to which they will use questionable financial engineering) they use these "business assets" to drive home a favorable financial outcome for the stakeholders.
This is one of the most ridiculous ideas I have seen recently and Trump has been in the news since then. Can you imagine not being able to work on a given feature on a given day or having otherwise sane builds of software that behave differently based on the clock?
Why not?

Because it's wasted bandwidth. AMP can easily intercept the CDNed version and serve a cached copy. If it's part of your bower build, it can't.
Because it caches articles offline in the background.
Money also flows freer from where it is more available, though. Your statement would imply that rich people's proclivities reflect general values, regardless of the source of their wealth, which doesn't seem right.
Getting rid of people would (or should) be the last thing on their minds.
Reducing cost does not mean increasing growth. If anything, it further damages any chance to recover.

Now firing someone clearly and directly responsible for the reduced growth on the other hand...
Well, you'd have 2 mental clones of yourself, essentially.

It depends where those neurons were sent off to in the meantime and what they were doing, but with such a big jolt, it's quite possible they would perceive themselves as "clone" (after understanding the situation at large) while you in your new machine self would be the "original you".
AngelList Announces $400M Early-Stage Fund
Oops. Missed that!
The 6502 core in the 2A03 and 2A07 is the only I know of that had the BCD support removed, which reduced licensing fees as the BCD circuitry was the only patented part of the 6502. That's my guess as to the meaning of the ".7"
WhatsApp offers Android users back-up in Google Drive
Related to your second point, here's a piece that really got me thinking: https://medium.com/@urchkin/leveling-both-sides-of-the-playi....

I'd love to see the industry become less masculine, rather than the onus being on women to act more masculine.
TL:DR; The brain is very complex so it will take long, I don't know how long and I don't dare to make an estimate, but, as I'm getting older I am more and more at peace with dying.
26 Productivity Apps Every Entrepreneur Needs to Use
You'd do well to peruse a few of the replies to the person you replied to. Your brief screed is rather off the mark.
FWIW Alex Russell wrote a great article about why our current approaches don't work and why this is interesting to explore: https://infrequently.org/2015/08/doing-science-on-the-web/

[Full disclosure: I work on this project]
We could just ask IT to set up flags on internal applications/users if there was a business need...
This is the top voted comment right now, but I'm struggling to understand it.

You grant (at least for the sake of discussion) that more women would help with the tech industry's sex discrimination problems, and that diversity itself would "probably" be good.

But then you ask, "but other than that, why is it important?"

It makes no sense to disregard sex discrimination and diversity when considering whether this topic is important. Sex discrimination and diversity are themselves already important.

It's like asking about the benefits of exercise, setting aside the health benefits and psychological benefits.

> Why aren't we as worried that not enough men show interest in being nurses or kindergarten teachers or social workers?

People do worry about those topics, but we mostly talk about tech here on Hacker News.
I'm going to argue that direct public funding is the best way, and by that I mean the historical analogy of direct patronage or crowdfunding research today (e.g. experiment.com).

Today's 'big science' grant funding model is so far removed from the average citizen or constituent, that by the time they see or feel the impact, it's hardly recognizable anymore. Because it's behind paywalls, or is too technical, or locked in IP, or anti-collaboration.

What we need to solve this problem is a direct connection with research and science. If you were motivated to go out and seek an answer for yourself, then perhaps you'd be less likely to lean on witnesses, testimony, or experts that you don't understand. The reality is that before the internet, people never really had that ability to go out and seek the truth for themselves. And I mean 'Truth' with a capital T, within significance, reproducible, and transparent.

At least that's best thing short of everyone becoming a scientist, or doing science independently.
The greedy answer: because systematically discouraging 50% of the brainpower of the human species from entering one of our most productive and simultaneously short-staffed occupations is bad for technological progress and the growth of global wealth.

The humanist/utilitarian answer: because computer science is intrinsically awesome and rewarding, so global utility is maximized by ensuring that anyone who might be interested has an unimpeded path towards experiencing that awesomeness.
There's something disappointing about visiting a social news site and see posts on the front page that are over 5 months old.
Can publically funded research also be banned from indirect testimony? Isn't there also a conflict of interest if someone doing research on the federal dime is testifying as an expert to congress, which ostensibly is making decisions about future funding?

presumably testimony that unabashedly is hearing about continued funding (e.g. progress reports) should be OK.
> why the worry?

Artificially limiting the supply of talent to something that I assume many of us on HN believe to be an important field is not a good thing.

> Why aren't we as worried that not enough men show interest in being nurses or kindergarten teachers or social workers?

I think that is important, teaching young children particularly since good teachers can have an enormous influence on a large number of people.

One big difference however is in the scale of pay.
How Are Prehistoric Times Categorized? – The-Brainiac
If he's really that great, and if everything he says about the rest of the department is true, then he shouldn't have to work there. Give the money to Stanford or something.
Is your model smarter than an 8th grader?
purify specifically has a "comments" blocking option. Check if its on in Purify -> Preferences -> Enable/Disable Blocking Of: Comments.
Remember to head to settings -> safari -> content blockers, and switch off/on the content blocker when you modify it, also.
This is a sort of culture (in geographic terms) thing to be honest. There was a very nice article somewhere that compared the values of the East and the West. Talking highly of yourself actually comes off as negative in the East. In the East, humility is considered far more respectable, where as the same comes off as weak in the west.
How did the botnet operators discover your server? Were you running any service/website on it?
Implementation in Javascript - https://github.com/nparashuram/seamcarving

Demo - http://nparashuram.com/seamcarving/
We have those in California. New houses are generally built in "Mello Roos" districts, in which bonds are issued to cover things like new schools, streets, and sewers. Homeowners in those districts pay extra property taxes, which in theory go toward retiring the bonds.
We have 400V 3-phase going to the racks; from the PDU's in each rack the phases are split in the usual fashion and so the equipment eats 230V 1-phase as usual in this part of the world. This seems fairly common these days, all the vendors offer such PDU's off the shelf, nothing special.
>Some people like to live on quiet tree lined streets not in a Manhattan

A.k.a they don't want to share.
Its a fair point, but its a little bit more complex than that.

For example, EMC's valuation is really dominated by VMWare, of which it owns 80% (indeed, much of the strategic discussion around EMC before Dell emerged had focused on a merger where the parent bought out VMWare or the other way around). VMWare is currently trading ~$33B; Dell could easily take a portion of that stake that EMC owns (say, 25% of that 80%, which would still allow it to maintain majority control) and put that out in the market and generate ~$8B or so (maybe more). Moreover, they could (and probably will) spin off business units that they have less interest in (speculating here, but RSA?). Because EMC has had this traditional federation model, the spinoff / sale of business lines is probably easier than in most areas.

No matter what, the debt overhang is still large, but its definitely not as large as it appears at first glance.
There's a pretty big difference between research funding from a private group that wants support/pr for actions it's already decided to take, and research funding that's allocated by a group of one's scientific peers. Even if there's some element of "corruption" in pandering to granting agencies, paying for PR cover under the guise of research is a lot worse.
And really, in most places it wasn't even an option until the early-mid 2000s.
You're conflating wanting death and accepting that it will happen, in both the case of oneself and family/friends. You think that "acceptance" is some BS we cooked up because we had no other choice, and that's a fine position, but don't caricature acceptance as actively wanting death.

> do you want to die?

No. I also want an infinite supply of resources (for me, and for everybody else, why not), the ability to experience any scenario I can dream up with any people I want even if they don't want it, omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. The inevitability of death is perhaps a classic denial, but there are infinite other ways you can't always have what you want. (At the risk of sounding defeatist, trite, and in favor of The Order of Things.) If you could wave a wand and force any person to love you, would it be meaningful? If you were guaranteed to get whatever you wanted in any other sphere? Maybe I'm rambling here, but the point is, how will removing death solve all the other problems that come with billions of autonomous agents with generally incompatible wills existing together in a single, inherently meaningless universe with (probably) immutable physical laws and finite time, matter, and energy?

OK, so solving death is an incremental improvement, and thus may be worth it to some... but perhaps I've described a reason not everybody is going to be obsessed with it -- it's just one form of a vastly large general problem.

Also, I'm wondering what "more people car[ing]" about eradicating death would look like to you. The article discusses "digitizing the brain", there are thousands of scientists and dollars spent on eradicating certain cancers and other diseases, and many other sciences that could be applied to this problem. You're welcome to fund/conduct your own research, but apparently other people have more pressing concerns.
The article says multiple times that when young people make choices about e.g. should they learn programming, they of course use their own free will, but they often decide based on incorrect expectations. As another example it mentioned how men often avoid becoming an English major for similar reasons. I'm not sure if english majors consider a skewed gender representation for their craft, but frankly I don't think I even care. What I do care about is the fact that computer science now gets dumber people by scaring away people through false expectations.

Doing small things to fix these flawed expectations has nothing to do with dismissing others as little girls who only care about nail polish. Articles suggestions like changing the course name from "programming in java" to a more descriptive "creative problem solving with python" hardly warrants such criticism.
I think existing Shareholders will hold onto VMWare Tracking Stock making the purchase less than 50B.
Most mathematicians prefer research to teaching. Some absolutely detest teaching and hate the fact that they're forced to do it, while some rather like teaching and just wish it didn't take up so much time, but pretty much all of them would rather be doing research.

So the idea of employing a full-time lecturer seems quite appealing -- let the lecturers take care of all the boring crap like teaching freshmen how to integrate, and leave the research to the professors.

But wait! What if the university starts to figure out that they can get all their teaching done waaay more cheaply just by employing full-time lecturers? Professors have been doing well for the past few centuries by selling the idea that only a researcher is qualified to teach at the highest levels, and hence that they should be allowed to spend most of their time thinking about mathematics and only be obliged to teach a couple of classes a year. Full-time lecturers threaten not just the jobs of mathematics professors, but the entire future of global mathematics

So I can definitely sympathise with this view.
There have been so many articles about the troubles caused by bad gut bacteria, but hardly anything about how normal people can improve it.

This guy seems to have done both for skin bacteria.

It's worth noting that he washes hands (presumably after visiting the bathroom) and he bathes in order to remove dirt (as opposed to remove sweat)

So, if he (and this is speculation) washes hands after bowel movement, shouldn't he be washing that area regularly as well?
I'm not advocating banning religion here, I'm only expressing my wish more people cared about solving death - especially those who just give up and accept it as "natural order". But still, this is just a social attitude that people acquire as they grow up, and with contemporary science and technology we should revisit that attitude, since we're finally capable of making concrete progress towards life extension.
Why is this relevant today?
Two words, though: unmetered bandwidth.
The other side of the story is that they probably want a consistent approach to education,

having people go "unconventional" as they say.

might work but it also might backfire. Its like being on the bleeding edge.You might bleed.

I think the fast food analogy plays on the fact that every burger should be equal quality.

Innovation comes at a cost in education, you are playing with lives.
Also, horses do smell. Same for dogs. Try burying your nose in their fur, it's usually fairly smelly, unless the owner bathes the pet regularly.
Probably a decent rule of thumb is: does disclosing the source of funding make the research conclusion less credible?

In TFA -- yes, to the point that it wasn't fully disclosed.

For publicly funded research -- probably not.
Sometimes you get a cool severence package when you are laid-off. $ * #of years at the job and other benefits. The people that stay get nothing but more work.
Programming in a museum? Creative coding for art mediation (2014)
How to Effectively Improve Mobile App Retention
The whole enterprise was/is bound for eventual failure unless perhaps you have nano particle drones that hunt for bacteria or perhaps a genetically engineered immune system to do the same, but I think bacteria will be up to the challenge of dealing with those too.

You are dealing with survivors that have been around for over a billion years. And all your hubris lasted you less than 100 years. If you think about it with any sort of intelligence or foresight, you see that this is a failed enterprise as it is. Drugs for everyone does not work, because that means that you are making the war against trillions of individual bacteria cells. Of coarse they will figure out a cure for your "anti-biotic", they are searching for it with all that they got.

Medical dark ages are inevitable. Bacteria are survivors just like we are survivors.
> 2) I always thought many STEM professors were useless educators who only taught students as a by-the-way while they chased fame/recognition among their peers for academic-success (or status).

Well, you forgot Research Dollars. It's an open secret that STEM undergraduate education is seen as a departmental obligation, and that your goals, and what you were hired to do is produce new research. Best case scenario you use classes to filter and train people to perform your wage slave researcher staff. Realistically, STEM is moving towards a Lecturer / Researcher model, though faculty unions, senates, and ethics panels have opinions on the matter.

In contrast, instead of research dollars subsidizing undergraduate education, math departments generally are set up to use education to subsidize research. Fortunately mathematician's needs are typically quite modest. But when cheaper Lecturers are introduced to the department, it's clear that the department could be cut.

> As many others are saying, it would be better for this guy to leave, because if the department was overtly toxic before, the true assholism will shine once the other profs create a siege mentality against this guy for "outing them".

Realistically, it sounds like they're already in siege mentality. The picture he paints is that hiring an adjunct was controversial within the department because it represents a shift away from research, especially if he can improve on outcomes despite larger class size. Several tenure track faculty lines could feasibly be cut as a result of decreased need for teaching.

His best case scenario would have been for the information in that open letter to reach the hands of the people in power pushing for more Lecturers (and less tenure track faculty lines), before he was fired.
To expand on your point, psychedelics have been suppressed even before that. Witches burnings in Europe for example, have been related to those "witches" taking psychedelic plants and potions. The Christian missionaries explicitly banned Indians from taking peyote and magic mushrooms as it was considered a "communion with the devil" in their eyes.
In which case, I absolutely agree. I've made the mistake of sharing my thoughts on these issues before.

"But once you’ve won a culture war, free speech is a nuisance, and “eliminating” language becomes a necessity." - http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/thats-no...
Which bank would you recommend in the UK?
Tell HN: Unicorns aren't ad-supported
Looking at the "Complete list of unicorns"[1], something stands out. Out of the top 50 startups by valuation, only three, Snapchat, Pintrest, and Vice, are ad-supported. The others all sell a product or service paid for by its users.
Advertising may have powered the first dot-com boom, but it's not powering this one.

[1] https://www.cbinsights.com/research-unicorn-companies/
I took his Math 1A class (1st semester of calculus) in Fall 2013, which was his first semester here.

Pros:

1)He made calculus engaging, exciting, and worth going to for an 8AM class. I never felt like it wasn't worth it.
2)Convinced me to be a math major by inciting my passion for math.
3)He genuinely cares and spend an enormous amount of time working 1-on-1 with students to help everyone. He freely gives out his cell phone number and asks students to call him any time if they need help.

Cons:

1)His class is very poorly structured. No quizzes. The midterms don't count if you don't want them to, which means 100% of your grade can be the final.
2)His Graduate Student Instructors that teach smaller group discussions get carte blanche to be as lazy as they want. They don't have to administer quizzes and the three that I saw didn't give a rat's ass.
3)His exams are a joke. Most of it is literally just memorizing a proof. The basic derivatives and integrals on the test are really easy. Many of the pre-med and pre-Haas students love him because of the easy A's he gives out.

In Summary: The department has valid claims against his classes, but he is doing something Berkeley's math department desparately needs: teaching lower division math better.
To sum this up, men in software engineering are like a bunch of children and expect everyone around them to be exactly the same. I couldn't agree more. I'd wager that most software companies (all i've worked for) have no sense of work etiquette because a lot of engineers are in some sort of la-la land where you don't have to grow up and the smarter you are the more you get to act as an odd, grown child. Is anybody really surprised that this is driving women away? It would be interesting to know how this compares to professional engineers (mechanical, electrical etc) and the environments they work in. I'd be shocked if the same level of immaturity passes there.
I found at George Mason University that my best professors were lectures, adjunct, and those not on a tenure-track. I recall my first calculus professor loudly proclaiming his disdain for teaching. He told us explicitly that he would much rather be doing research, he hated teaching, but because he was tenured, there's absolutely nothing we could do about it. So we could deal with it or find another class. He was the reason I didn't pursue mathematics at George Mason University, because I sadly realized that most of the department had the same feelings.
Bottled Water: Real-Time Integration of PostgreSQL and Kafka
Probably because it helps justify longer working hours and low pay.
>A society that adapts to become biologically immortal will find their own ways to adapt to dealing with zeitgeists and progress

I think that the adaptation phase would be a very turbulent one,because we would experience the giant gap between reality and our heritage. Most our motivators, values and culture in general are founded around the idea that we do not have that much time (think about stuff like taking care of others, parenthood, work-life balance, achievements etc.) Without the time constraints many of these would become obsolete. But they're "hard wired" inside our organisms. And would cause problems just like adrenaline rushes and other (once useful) reactions to stress cause problems today.
Just too many burnt out brainless hippies/commies in California.
He was previously in the news for "crossing a picket line":

http://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2014-...
This is up there with some of the best conference talks I have watched online

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcc6JEhDSpo
It should be noted that this is a fairly common pattern in graduate mathematics departments at public schools - IMO, it is to give students a chance when given outstanding resources.

I experienced something similar while at UIUC for math, but I passed the comprehensive exams solidly (my first attempt at two of them were thwarted by abnormally difficult exams where almost no one passed).

I ultimately left, but largely due to non-academic reasons combined with the state of Illinois stealing the university's budget allocation. Teaching wasn't too bad, but life in the tech industry sure beats academia.