skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You haven't shown anything of the sort. iandanforth made the factual observation that various countries define the worker:employer relationship differently and you responded with a facile assertion that only foolish people would fail to put economic interests over people and a single cherry-picked example, which itself was too simplistic to be of use[1].

Now you're going on with some narrative about how people don't want to work which is straight out of right-wing talk radio and which you've failed to supported even with an anecdote this time. It's absurd to claim that poor countries are poor because they provide too many benefits to workers at the expense of business when we regularly hear reports about the brutally unforgiving lifestyles of sweatshop workers, subsistence farmers, etc. Conversely, you've failed to even show awareness that some countries have both strong economies and significant social support – Germany provides significantly more for workers than the United States but it would be absurd to claim that this depends on other countries to “support them indefinitely”.

So … could you start over and explain precisely the principle you believe is in effect here, and how it holds true across e.g. the G-10 countries?

1. Greece's economy wasn't exactly great before but their immediate crisis was caused by corruption aided by malfeasance by major banks, not inefficiencies which they've had for generations. Absolutely none of it had to do with benefits to workers or people being lazy.
Why did the communist collapse? because of their different economy or because they were God fighting bloodthirsty killers? God oposes the pridefull. They failed at materializm the very thing they preached could they be more ashamed.
The USSR didn't "ally" with Germany. They signed a non-aggression treaty, which basically meant they agreed to not attack each other while partitioning weaker states. Which is similar to what the western powers did together with Germany at the Munich agreement (which didn't include the USSR).
Both your story and the torrent are fascinating. Thank you for sharing.
Non-us requesters, even. I just got this from their site after wanting to setup an account:

"""
Why is the country set as United States?

At this time Mechanical Turk does not support Requesters from countries outside the United States.

"""
Yes! I can't wait for the module to be merged upstream into nginx so I can use it.
That's the thing though: they are different, and applying some thought will bring to light the way in which they are different. But most people who are against these things apply their efforts at conflating them due to their similarities, not understanding the importance of the differences.

Just look at the way abortion arguments go. You can't just go around saying "abortion is murder" and "a fetus is a person" without completely failing to consider the ways in which you could be wrong. And that's fairly easy to do, because there are plenty of people trying to tell you otherwise.
I'd like to learn more about this. Any links/ resources you'd care to share ?

I tried Googling reflectors but nothing relevant turns up.
Trucking subsidies? I find that a bit of a strange attitude.

Without the roads there would be no deliveries. No deliveries, no industry. No industry, no jobs. So of all the things to call it, a trucking subsidy seems a very loaded description.
My intentions is that I want a complete list of .no (Norwegian) domains, and http://norid.no refuse to give out that list to anyone.

I would like to be able to continuously check the Norwegian IP-space for compromised sites, because it would be interesting to see. Of course doing this on a bigger scale would be cool as well.
What is a god? Does a superpowerful phenomena that many anthropomorphise qualify? A being that can bless or curse people at a whim, whose ways are mysterious? An entity more powerful than kings and countries?

If so, market economy is the one god we've created, and we most definitely should be scared of it.
What? How did it improve their personal well being? They were ostracized from the sports community.
"Explore It" by Elisabeth Hendrickson [1] is a short, easy-to-read introduction to exploratory testing ("manual testing") that has many concrete ideas for what and how to test SW.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Explore-Increase-Confidence-Explorator...
>Ok, you are pretty explicitly appealing to the Copenhagen theory of ethics. Good to have that out in the open.

I don't appeal to any such BS. The so called "Copenhagen theory of ethics" is an ill-thought neologism of the writer of the blog post, and lacks several metric tons of nuances and considerations.

The basic premise -- that a third-party has the same "moral obligation" to pay her maternity leave as the person who employeed her, made money of her (the total balanace was positive on THEIR side, not hers) and fired her when she become pregnant, is absurd.

Not only that, but protections against firing an employee that became pregnant are an accepted part of the legal and moral obligations of an employee, enforced by law in most developed countries.

If anything the burden of proof is on the author of TFA to counter the thinking of all those legislators.

I would also like to know how a deal like "I'll give you food everyday for having sex with you" to a poor woman who hates the idea, but is starving and thus accepts it, is any different than the situations lauded by the author of TFA article.

After all the woman is better off, right? She would be starving or even dead from hunger. And she accepted the deal by her own volition.
Scala React interface: Cross-platform apps using Scalajs
Timers in the Linux kernel, Part 2: Introduction to the clocksource framework
There is no economic system that will help you if you are a bad person. If you are good then you can hope on success because the victory is God's grace.
I really believe the person in the article is just strongly introverted, and that's it.

School puts a lot of pressure into socializing students, without caring about individual sensitivities. I personally hate working with other people, and there are actually plenty of people who do. Learning is a tedious task, so I'll never understand why school must be social.

There is always the same situation that occurs to me. Some guy just start talking to me while I'm doing something. I'm obviously uninterested in talking with the guy, and for some reason I'm the sociopathic weirdo. Interacting has become a standard, and those who fails to do so are quickly put away or seen at failing in society.

I really believe that society can't tolerate outcasts. Society really feels like an army of acolytes who only hold social norms. Maybe it's the remnants of instituting civilization through religion, maybe that's why people can't behave without having a set of beliefs who don't have any ideas behind them.
You should visit the Friday Squid posts on Bruce Schneier's blog. There are often good conversations about this kind of thing.
He is a physicist which means he likely understand the concept of feedback loops. It only takes so much STEM education to start noticing some worrying trends. Also, Hawking probably reads other smart people, including economists. It's not as if he first noticed this problem. It's only that if you're famous, media actually report on what you have to say.
Alcohol is the real threat to cognition, and we don't talk about it. [1] [2]

We don't know where the line is exactly, but somewhere around 4-5 drinks over a few hours has an acute neurotoxic effect.

Cannabis use in adolescents does not result in changes that can be picked up on high resolution MRI scans. [3] This is a considerable finding considering that one would expect changes just from the added stress of being a cannabis user in a prohibition environment (fear of arrest, fear of expulsion, fear of parental punishment upon discovery). It may even point to a protective effect of cannabis on the brain, as we see in Parkinson's and has been seen in other studies and in stroke. [4]

A UK study on the IQ effects of moderate cannabis use on students did not find evidence of harm. The study did find significant evidence of cognitive deficits caused by alcohol use. [5]

Why do young adults want to get high so much? I think the answer is that they are coping with the stress of being locked into institutions that do not serve them, do not respect them and offer them very little, while demanding very much.

One of the themes of Ferris Bueller's Day Off was high school as prison. The entire movie is a jail break story, and I think it gets to the truth of what its like to be doing time in high school better than anything.

It's no wonder so many teenagers cope by getting high as much as they can. And then we blame them, and treat them like criminals, when they are just sufferers of low mood.

We need a radically different approach to high school education. I think we need to find a way for people to be more economically useful, economically empowered and more in control of their lives at younger ages.

[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25702705

[2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3183294/

[3] http://www.jneurosci.org/content/35/4/1505.short

[4] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10863546

[5] http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/10/22/no...
>"humans are inherianty cheap"

Desperate humans are cheap, I would say. And until we have a completely global market place for labour, there will always be a large disparity between what we think an individual is worth, and how little an individual is willing to work for due to their local circumstances.

As usual, I fault the governments that promise but don't fix, election after election.
100 Things Worth Every Penny [Forbes 1999]
As this is framed more as the results of a policy change, there are some things to consider when banning weed:

- Street sales to tourists and foreigners exploded. Small-time dealers reported weekly income of 2k Euros during the prohibition.

- Dutch teenagers use less weed than German, UK and Belgian teens. Legal availability seems inversely correlated with actual use.

- In France there is no clear distinction between hard drugs and soft drugs. A dealer will sell you pot, but also heroin.

- There are other ways to get weed, without using a weed pass. Home growers will not check the age of the person they are selling to.

Smoking weed in Holland has a social stigma attached to it. It is not cool, it is for chumps. Policy changes like these may make it dangerous, hidden and cool again, actually raising our usage to the levels of neighboring countries.

As to the results, I shudder and think: Imagine what Feynman would have been able to achieve, if he had no access to weed or bongos for seven months...
He describes how undeniably exceptional he is, and then implies that his experience should be a guide for unexceptional people.

There will always be outliers.
Peak idiocy so far, but given the extreme "feminism" that is taking ahold of the industry this is just the beginning.
List of best websites for in-depth reading
This however have relevance for readers, because they are going to use those cliches afterwards, and will, for example, call for "stronger measures" because "that's how it is done", citing article they read years ago.
People often make comments outside of their areas of expertise. Even Hawking, who's said some disappointing things in the past about philosophy, for example.
Are people not realizing that everything after the first sentence is a direct quote from the Yegge rant?
> Employees also accrue 1 hour of sick leave for every 30 hours of work, but cannot accrue more than 5 days of sick leave.

Six months to earn 5 days of sick leave. Why is sick leave a privilege? You're either sick or you're not.

If I get the flu 3 months in, do I just take my two days off then come in and infect the office?
Some manual testing would have uncovered that.
I really don't understand why advertisers just don't require website to host those ads instead.
Racism is very clearly defined.

With your logic whites could not be racist in South Africa, because of black majority.
Personally, it would have to be worse than the impact on your life for getting a felony charge for possession.

This whole "we have to put people in jail and destroy any and all future job prospects for their own protection" is madness.
He is simply right.

The global trend is, that governments in all nations loose more and more of their former power and (partially) dump it to international corporations which hold the real power in their hands.

There is an older documentary, that is still valid with the name "The Corporation" which shows, how corporations have used the US constitution and decades of lobbying and court cases to gain more and more power. So today, the corporations are difficult to held liable for things they do (in many cases they come away with small fees that don't even cover the harm they caused), but enjoy many of the rights which where meant for real citizen.

This documentary comes to the conclusion, that many corporations behave like psychopaths, because when a corporation has to decide, (for example) to keep the environment clean or make more profits, the corporation rule is, to go for the money and forget about the rest.

Anybody should watch this. Either on DVD, or I also spotted it on worlds favorite video site.

With international treaties like TTP and others, the power of international corporations is hardened and it gets more and more difficult to reverse this global trend. With all their lawyers and lobbyists, the corporations are bound to win over the democracies -- what dictators did not manage to.

This trend is undermining democracies and human rights, because corporations are not democratic and have only one rule to obey: The profit rule.

So finally, we are all governed by money and nothing else.
Thanks so much for your comment.!!! It is very difficult to get user feedback.
I'm not sure I follow your logic - are you equating 'majority establishment' with 'majority'?
Important distinctions. But redefining 'racism' to suit a particular dialog isn't going to play well. It rings of an exclusionary tactic common in activism to mark outsiders as wrong because they don't know the 'new truth'.

Short answer: we all know what racism is.
https://www.drugabuse.gov/about-nida/legislative-activities/...

Posted for the list of data sources. Read all of the articles on the site if you can. Conclusion: If you are fked up you are fed up and one would be showing poor judgement at the least and be legally liable at the most if they trusted you with ther child, finances, or company, regardless of how functional a drug-addict you are.
>Does a superpowerful phenomena that many anthropomorphise qualify?

From a certain point of view, it certainly does - in many animist and "pagan" beliefs, a person, ideal or even inanimate object can become a "god" through the power of collective worship and anthropomorphism. Neil Gaiman did a good job expressing this in Western terms in American Gods.
1) But access is not equal. Some people get a cab, others don't.

2) Does this apply to all goods? Are you simply advocating communism here?

3) I'm glad you acknowledge that you'd rather have us all be equally poor than have some be richer than others. This is probably another reason we disagree - I don't view other people having more than me as an intrinsically bad thing.

I guess the difference between our moral axioms is clear. I prefer the US model - high inequality but everyone is rich. You seem to prefer the India model - dire poverty but virtually everyone is equally poor.

This is apparently why we disagree. Good to know it's due simply to different moral axioms rather than some error in reasoning.
The study used a "diffs-in-diffs" technique which would control for that. It takes the difference between two groups, say English and Dutch, prior to banning marijuana for English students, and then looks at the difference between the two groups afterwards. So it's a way of looking at how the performance of the English group changed with banning the drug, while trying to control for the things that affected _all_ students.
In the hands of a hero each gun will strike a deadly blow. -- Mountain Wraith paraphraze
Just saying, page-faults are at least 2 orders of magnitude slower then this has the potential to be, though I would be interested in a version that wouldn't erase on power up. I bet someone could write something for linux that would get the whole block treated like a ram disk, and you'd probably see some amazing performance out of it for many common things like serving web pages. Makes me curious about designing it so you could boot straight from there and have servers that were just mobo+ram+flashram.
The group work required of students isn't even remotely representative of the type of collaborating that is required in the workplace. It's just a bullshit excuse to tick a box they know appeals to potential employers.
Wasnt the world of Star Trek as depicted in tv series basically communist/socialist where technologies such as replicators, warp drives and very cheap energy making the "Federation way of life" possible, freeing people to explore space/art/science etc

Basically it depicted world(s) of plenty, tho' yes it did have wars and trade etc, which is what made Deep Space 9 and the Ferengi so interesting :)
I didn't say we wouldn't make use of other planets as places to live, but I believe we should respect the native life that almost certainly exists on some planets.

I'm glad we're taking this attitude towards Mars at the moment, exploring but being careful not to bring Earth's lifeforms over to Mars to breed.

In any case, my question still stands, what do you/we hope to gain from infinite economic growth?
(You mean “documentary”, not “documentation” – I was confused for while.)

Also, link: http://thecorporation.com/
No.

TPP, huge inequality, centralization, unemployment ARE NOT a consequence of free market capitalism.

In such case, automation just doesn't outpace the labor market.

Now, when tech companies are partying with an artificial economy controlled by the government, they have more than enough money to that.
Well... I can see how it can be easy to reach conclusions like this. The same result (most likely even worse) would be reached even if the effect of alcohol was studied instead of cannabis. This is not surprising, but neither is it interesting in my opinion. Of course there is a correlation between time spent doing mentally engaging activities and success, and surely smoking weed is not a mentally engaging activity. But this does not imply anything about moderate consumption in leisure time, neither does it mean that we should never engage in activities in which we do not exercise our brain.
I am trying to appreciate your position on this: the problem is, we ought to know what's right 'in the thick of it' using the two C's - choice and consent. Like discriminate-against minorities (disclosure: I am black), gays do not have a choice to be who they are. Therefore, their position, if you will, is a biological one (as is mine). You mentioned pedophiles and zoophiles, who, could also (possibly and unfortunately) have the disposition of just being who the are without choice. Yet... the difference is consent - no one should get the right to take away the rights of innocent children, or innocent animals for that matter, much less kill, enslave, or otherwise harm them (as was the case with blacks, etc). There is no harm in my being black to anyone who is white, just as there is no harm in being Aboriginal or gay. The rules didn't change. The point is that they (human rights) need to apply equally to everyone.
From the description:

OK, I have to admit this this is a strange collection. In the late 1980's and early 1990's, I worked for Kmart behind the service desk and the store played specific pre-recorded cassettes issued by corporate. This was background music, or perhaps you could call it elevator music.
Startup are hard and full of compromises ;(

The only the real red flag i see is whether you trust your technical co-founder. I assume you do.

The other issues u raise are not unexpected.

1. MBA guy turns out to be sleazy. Well duh.. Thats his job!

2. previous advisor gets burned. Well duh.. As soon as you made the decision to go with your new MBA partner with lots of equity this was bound to happen. Not every one wins.

3.CEO makes decisions which upsets you. Well - thats his job. To get the numbers up, revenue up, growth up. you need to give him a fair chance to do his job. How would you feel if he started refactoring your code?

4.your equity and vesting seems fair and you appear to be properly protected (@samsheen). If the times come and everyone else agrees that ROLE changes are required - then so be it. This should not effect your equity.

5. I find your co-founder seems to have a more mature reaction to these issues. this is a good sign! Maybe you have to accept that life is not perfect.

But everything above changes if you no longer trust your original co-founder.

Hope it helps!
To be fair, it's not really capitalism he is arguing against, but rather Special Interest groups misusing their position in a capitalistic system. Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize winning liberal / "capitalist", spoke against monopolies and Special Interest groups for ~30 years [1].

I would have loved to see a Milton Friedman and Thomas Piketty debate although. :-)

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2T2Ee8zm6s
An Introduction to Cybernetics (1957) [pdf]
Sign up? I think not.
If you could explain to the people of an earlier time all our modern conveniences and how many hours we work and how little physical effort goes into almost every job, it would probably sound just like that to them.
The Economics of Star Trek (2000)

http://stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Trek-Marxism.html
For me it's the difference between this:

1st person: These people are starving. I will treat them as I would a non-starving person, say pay them $xx/hour which I calculated is enough to build a profitable business.

2nd person: These people are starving. I will pay them the least I can get away with it, after all it's not like they have many options. Sure, I could make a profit even if I paid them 10 times that, but why go there? Fuck them, they should be grateful that they get anything instead of nothing at all.

For me, the 2nd person is a jerk. I wouldn't want them anywhere near my society. Scum of the earth.

And the whole "Copehangen" theory BS wants us to believe that it's either (2) or nothing -- that paying people in need the lower you can (near substinence) is the only thing possible.

There are several shades between (1) and (2), but most proponents of such ideas go for the full-on (2), and then pretend they are some kind of benefactors too.