skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In short, the picture that’s emerged suggests that the Internet has made bullying both harder to escape and harder to identify.

I strongly disagree with this statement. The internet has made bullying far easier to avoid; you just don't participate in the first place. That option doesn't exist when you're in a school and have no choice but to see these people every day.

Perhaps it was growing up with what we had in the late 90's and early 2000's that made this seem trite, because at that time the only way we (at least my friends) seemed to communicate online was via insult. I never felt the urge to participate in identity exposing social media, and perhaps that was a lesson learned from the early years of my experiences online. The kids I know of now coming up through high school and college have advertised nearly every intimate detail of their lives for all to read on the tubes.

I was bullied a bit in high school, but it never really affected me negatively. If anything it made me never want to replicate the aggressor's behavior.

I google my name from time to time to see what is out there, but all I ever find are video game tutorials from my Diablo II days and my LinkedIn profile.
Does a state monopoly necessitate abolishing private options? What about a public default?
Fortunately, everybody else does. Why would we not want to be able to discern life-threatening information sooner?

Not to mention the value in correlating another physiological change with the disease. Maybe research into how this works can get us closer to a cure.
Does Life on Earth Violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics? (2006)
> a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Indeed. I'd suggest that your understanding of what they do might be a little underdeveloped. (And perhaps your company is particularly dysfunctional.)
A service combining personal training with executive coaching
well done Nik, Adam & rest of Mashape! May the force be with you all :)
Wow, this article makes me miss these people intensely. I went to a Rusticatio when it was in Petaluma, California, about a decade ago, and all the same people were there!

Praestantissimi estis, socii.
Ad `textInput.checked = true;`, this quite a misconception. You can totally set `anyDOMnode.whateverProperty = 'batman'` and retrieve it back. Itʼs just few special DOM object properties that are mapped to HTML attributes on certain types of elements that actually do something meaningful, like the @checked property of HTMLinputElement objects that happen to have @type="checkbox".
Why is similar to SQL but different, wouldn't be better to add the MATCH parameter to SELECT on good old SQL?

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypher_Query_Language:

MATCH (charlie:Person { name:'Charlie Sheen' })-[:ACTED_IN]-(movie:Movie)
RETURN movie

to

SELECT movie
FROM Movie movie, Person person
WHERE person.name = 'Charlie Sheen'
MATCH person-[:ACTED_IN]->movie;
How is it simultaneously meaningless and also a justification for further study?
When the civilization is confined to one small planet while hitting the physical limits to growth, the fixed pie is a good analogy.

There is fixed and diminishing amount of arable land to grow the wheat and apples. You can make only so many pies.
Ok, so you will always have perfect correlation and since you spun the polarizer after the photons started moving that implies spooky action at a distance.

right?
That's ridiculous. That's like saying someone who wins the lottery is clairvoyant with P=0.00. I mean they got the exact right numbers which had 1 in 147 million chance, right?
I'm not sure why they are using Facebook as their example. There, I have so many choices on how I want to deal with a bully. I can:

1.) Delete their harassing posts and/or report them.

2.) Use the privacy settings so they can't see or interact with me

3.) Not use the service if it isn't contributing to my well-being

It's hardly inescapable, and I was just using Facebook's options as examples because I know it's interface pretty well. Similar things could be said for most of these places. Unlike the schoolyard scenario, no one is forcing you to engage with the bullies: you can almost always block/ignore.
Light Goes Infinitely Fast with New On-Chip Material
What I think GP means is that "Satoshi Nakamoto" fails the "secure" point of Zooko's triangle: there are two or more entities to which "Satoshi Nakamoto" maps. Human names are decentralized and human-meaningful, but not secure.

This is where the blockchain (or some other log-like data store) becomes important. By giving you a total ordering of which principal has written a claim on a name, you can achieve the "secure" property by applying a validation policy as a function of claim order to determine which principal the name points to. For example, you might say that "Satoshi Nakamoto" shall refer to the first principal to claim it in the blockchain, and subsequent claims by other principals should be treated as invalid.

The reason to use a blockchain to store the history of name claims is simply because the blockchain is a trustless, decentralized data structure (achieving the "decentralized" point in the triangle). If this property isn't important to your use-case, then other log-structured data stores will do just fine.
So it literally was invented after a night of drinking at a bar. :-) I wonder about the origins of <marquee>.
Keep in mind that Google is hiring some of these people to their Cambridge office. I was just there (interning) over the summer, and a PHD intern was working on a project in this area
Why not Marx's Capital? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital:_Critique_of_Political... - "Marx aimed to reveal the economic patterns underpinning the capitalist mode of production"
Happy to report that it only showed me, since I already had my privacy settings adjusted. Whew!
> A world in which everyone suffered from horrible poverty would be a perfectly equal one, he says, but few would prefer that to the world in which we now live. Therefore, “equality” can’t be what we really value.

Frighteningly fallacious logic. I want a house with a pool. But I don't want one a 2-hour commute from work even if it has a pool. Does that mean I don't value the pool?

Stuck through it for shits and giggles, but the article doesn't really get better from there.
I always wonder how readable those queries really are. Its a nice claim but has anyone done any really serious research about this at all?
For example the same in SPARQL 1.1

SELECT ?cypher_attributes
WHERE {
?cypher a <QueryLanguage> ;
<queries> ?graphs ;
<attributes> ?cypher_attributes .
?user <USES> ?cypher .
FILTER (?user IN ‘Oracle’, ‘Apache Spark’, ‘Tableau’, ‘Structr’)
?opencypher <MAKES_AVAILBLE> ?cypher .
}

Instead of

MATCH (cypher:QueryLanguage)-[:QUERIES]->(graphs)
MATCH (cypher)<-[:USES]-(u:User) WHERE u.name IN [‘Oracle’, ‘Apache Spark’, ‘Tableau’, ‘Structr’]
MATCH (openCypher)-[:MAKES_AVAILBLE]->(cypher)
RETURN cypher.attributes

In the SPARQL case the graph flow does not revert on the edge with <USES> (it can using
?cypher ^<USES> ?user, but it would be weird and in the larger queries very confusing). The SPARQL case also tends to group related concepts together.

This assumes a DEFAULT BASE URI is selected for the SPARQL version that contains all the modeled relations. Which in a straight comparison to Cypher is a fair comparison.

I find Gremlin a lot nicer than Cypher, and a lot more powerful as well. Also up to today Neo4J just has not scaled all that well. I am awaiting the LDBC Benchmark results of Neo4J to see if I am wrong.

What Neo4J has been great at is making a nice solid product that aims at solving developer problems. I believe as a database it has not been that great at solving enterprise or life science community problems. Its still a single database instance without federation on demand.
I would probably enjoy wealth, yes. However, what I truly desire most would be to understand the Universe. Understand reality. What are we? Are we?(see some of Dr. James Gates work on supersymmetry) So many questions and, it would seem, way too much geopolitical bullshit on this planet to ever truly get any answers.
FBIs advice for cryptolocker? Pay the ransom
Don't forget that palm oil is sometimes used in animal feed and will not be found on packaging.

A family member recently switched from buying margarine to butter after reading about the environmental effects of palm oil. Our dairy farming uncle then reminded us that they use palm oil in the feed for the animals to aid in managing digestion and fat levels.
Indeed. There are no good APIs for this.

With raw keyboard events a custom input won't be able to handle autocorrect, Japanese nor Chinese input. There's only draft of a Web IME API, but it still assumes you have a real `<input>` element.
So $3500 is considered "pay for it out of petty cash".
Karl Marx saw a couple flaws in Capitalism, similar to what we practice today. I think he's right about one and wrong about the other. And the part he's right about is what people find unfair.

He's right in that Capitalism is not about marking up a product to generate a profit by taking the cost of the goods and the labor to produce it but rather by paying labor less than what their labor is worth. And this is what bothers people. It isn't fair. And they are helpless to change it.

And it is what is happening more and more. And the eventuality of it is Capitalism will eat itself as those without will be large enough in numbers where they assume power. Those which did the exploiting will either have their heads rolled or at the very least made impotent and marginalized. This is revolution and leads to Socialism and eventually Communism.

The second part Marx argues is that only the State can sort out the best way to distribute means and goods - that the free market is too chaotic. This I disagree with and I think time has shown this to be false. The state will eventually be corrupt if it isn't already. And whose to say what is best for one person is also the best for the other?

So, the free market exists where people can pick and choose. They have freedom. This allows some to have more than others and I think people are in fact OK with that. In fact I think people want that because we believe in getting what you're worth. Its just they don't want their own labor to be discounted to the point of being exploited - which is happening more and more with through wage suppression via policy or globalism which has displaced a lot of people very quickly, even if it might eventually benefit everyone as a whole.
> Theres a theory that WIKILEAKS has been a FSB front since 2010

...linking to a post on /r/conspiracy.

There are also a theories, in the very same sub, that drinking is own urine is better the chemotherapy [0], that China has floating cities in parallel universe [1] and that Ahmed Mohammed is a "clock bomb hoaxer" [2].

Please keep on improving our discussion with wonderful sources like /r/conspiracy.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pp1z3/woman_wi...

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3psibh/another_...

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3psun2/ahmed_th...
What's this about?

The link doesn't contain any useful information besides that Chromium was somehow opened "in incognito mode" (there's no such thing, incognito mode applies to windows, not browser itself) and there are some connections spotted. No information whenever Chromium had sync enabled, whenever it has Google account associated, whenever it has any extensions installed, etc.

Say, I see a C2DM connection to get push notifications about updates. Whenever it's legit or not depends on the context. If browser's core has logged in user and a bunch of extensions installed, I'd say it's a bug if said connection is not present, even if no non-incognito windows are open at the moment.
20 Simple Steps to Content Creation
Hubble spies Big Bang frontiers
Common problems with cryptographic programming and how to avoid them (2013)
The electric eel's high-voltage discharges are subtle weapons
Arable land is a particularly bad example of a justification for a 'fixed pie'. Highly developed countries such as the USA have upwards of eight times the crop yield per acre compared with developing countries, and yield appears to be increasing everywhere. In fact, yields are improving so much that the amount of land dedicated to crop production worldwide has already or will soon begin decreasing.
Yeah, there will. People will complain about who got "more than their fair share" of the new pie.
It's not really an innate trust in media. It's the lack of anything better (and no, (most) blogs don't count) if you want to stay informed.
> It's frustrating how much Congress has ceded to these agencies.

It hasn't ceded any; Congress retains all legislative power. Regulatory power is a delegation (and the degree to which power can be delegated is limited), not a cession.

> it's a loophole in democracy.

It may not be something you like, but I don't think its really anything other than the system working as designed; executive agencies making decisions within parameters set by Congress through legislation, including decision that involve notice of predictable ways that executive power will be applied, within the limits set by legislation, in future cases (i.e., regulation) was not an idea that the founders would have been surprised by.
This is very true, and why conservative economics just won't die.

People would rather see those less fortunate have to beg and suffer than to give up what they 'worked' for.

Never mind the fact that we all derive benefit from systems that we inherited, and did not work for...
It does mean that the pool isn't the thing you value most though, since you value your commute more than the pool.
My point is precisely that this property isn't critical for identity.

And no, blockchains aren't trustless, at least not in the sense in which trustless is generally used. In the case of Bitcoin, you have to trust that the miners will behave in a certain way. There are no mathematical guarantees.
Yeah, I don't get it either. However, there's more info on creator's website: http://www.fabianburghardt.de/swisscolors.html

It's still not clear if it's any different from Bauhaus. I was expecting Itten's Farbkreis or something.

edit:spelling
From Outsourcing Your Life to Full Automation (Part One)
Your marketing office
Sorry, I was typing NPcomplete and meant NP. :-(
Except that prisoners are a captive audience, being held by the Government, and the phone companies get a monopoly on an essential good. So a federal regulatory body absolutely makes sense.
Order matters. Suppose my key is compromised, stolen, or lost. If my revocation preceeds a subsequent signature from my key, then the subsequent signature can be considered invalid as well. Unlike a DHT, the blockchain provides everyone with my key's history with respect to every other key's history, so my stolen key cannot be used to impersonate me after I revoke it. Moreover, the blockchain grows at a constant rate, so attempts to censor the revocation will get noticed quickly, since I will notice when my transaction does not get accepted, and other principals will notice when blocks are not propagated.
I've always felt that when people talk about economic equality, they are talking about equality of access, not equality of 'things'. The Great American Dream is about someone seizing an opportunity; equality means we all have an opportunity to seize an opportunity. Economic Inequality means there is a disproportionate number of opportunities at the top, and very few at the bottom.

Not everyone takes those chances, but we want to make sure those who do have the shots to gamble the take, so that there is a churn that allows the cream to rise to the top.

That, to me, is the meaning of the message of equality, and I suspect it's what people like Sanders are talking about.
There are a couple people picking on this research in the thread. This is a preliminary study, just a "bullshit test" to see if this woman is crazy or if she's not. It's obvious that she's not crazy, because all she's doing is sniffing t-shirts and she doesn't know who they belong to. The sample size is large enough, we have a p-value of no more than p=0.0012, and that's under the cynical assumption that she somehow knew that exactly seven of the twelve samples would have Parkinson's... something that the scientists didn't know.

So we know that something is going on here. The next steps are to control potential confounding variables and to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the test, if it's shown that she's not actually detecting some confounding variable. This is where you go double-blind, you use larger sample sizes, et cetera, now that you have money. You have money because the preliminary research was promising.

And we're not just getting a good test out of this. If there's an actual chemical that she's smelling, then there's some chemical process that's going on in people with Parkinson's which isn't happening in people without Parkinson's (or vice versa). Tracing these chemical pathways could give us clues to the etiology of the disease, which would be a REALLY BIG DEAL. Or maybe it's just a rabbit hole.
Joomla Core SQL Injection
A lot of people play the lottery. Only one person did this experiment. When you test multiple hypothesis (as in your lottery example), you need to perform a correction[2,3].

[1] https://xkcd.com/882/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_comparisons_problem

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonferroni_correction
Amazing work!
Which comes from nadhar (نظر) in Arabic. It is a loanword.
Hillary Clinton Should Be Worried About Prison, Not Polls
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law - The best way to get an answer on the internet is to say the wrong thing.
I understand, and this is out current model, but some argue for income equality, so I ask what kind of equality? Let's have goals before we discuss the merits.
I could be accused of many things. I didn't say they are trying to persecute anyone (though I think there's an argument to be made there), I said they obstruct efforts to help those who need it. And they undeniably do. Their justifications are the only facts of the matter which are up for debate. And I'm not intending to win over high ranking members of the republican party; rather establishment sycophants and independents and some left-wing people who feel some ridiculous need to always be considered "fair" or "balanced" -- there is an inclination among those who ask to be considered intelligent to always assume the correct answer lies in the middle of the two positions they are presented with. This is a fallacy and a dangerous one: sometimes one position is simply wrong, or put forth by dishonest or disingenuous or careless or misinformed people. And the "level-headed, thoughtful even handed" position of supposing the correct answer to always be in the middle forces each position to a further extreme in order to push the middle over further and further to their side.

My post was not particularly emotional; it's not really necessary to attack it by claiming so: claiming you are the logical reasonable one and I am being hysterical is a cheap schoolyard tactic and I'm not particularly moved by it. You asked a question and I answered it.

I intended with my post to defend the notion of unconditional rejection of a position or of an ideology or of a political group; we are allowed to just say that they are wrong. We aren't obligated to constantly justify their positions and look for ways in which they are right -- in fact if we do this we will be taken advantage of and it will cause even more extremism and polarization.

I despise utilitarianism and I'm not quite sure how you inferred I was one from my post.
“Show HN: Learned photoshop in 1 hour and came up with this”
Image maps were the best. We could have a clickable map of the U.S. that was fast-loading, cross-browser compatible, and did not require a plugin. What's not to like?

Today the way to do that is with javascript libraries like D3.js, which handle both drawing the map and detecting/directing clicks. That was not an option 8 years ago; javascript was too slow.
Zaid appears to be guilty not only because of the money but because of the physical altercation in 2011 a year before the murders. I suspect Saad seriously threatened Zaid during the altercation to the point revenge never left his mind. And since there was so much built up rage/hate in Zaid, he hired a hit-man to take out all of the heirs to provide a clean sweep to the mula. The heirs had to go because I suspect Zaid had to pay or payoff big for an undiscoverable hit! The cyclist was in the wrong place at the wrong time and aggressively targeted to throw off the investigation. But it is very clear who the mastermind is. I'm just wondering why he is being treated so kindly? And who does he know that may be protecting him? Hopefully Zaid doesn't have access to Saad's children.
In Egypt, this is also thing.

When you have kids and anything bad happens to them, people will say they were envied (Had Hasadoo), which is referring to this evil eye stuff.

As an outsider looking in, it drives me nuts.
Yes, this is one of the effects of the replacement of customer service agents with web interfaces. The same has happened with travel; searching for vacation options nowadays guarantees you access to every possible room in every possible location, ordered by the effectiveness of their SEO strategy. Previously, you used to go through travel agents and tour operators who offered curated selections of hotels. Sure, just like with your financial choices, the selection was potentially compromised - maybe the agents are getting extra commission to promote one hotel or investment plan - but there are other incentives against them completely screwing you (they are interested in recommendations and repeat business after all).

So sure - now we can bypass the agent and get to the raw list of every possible available product; but the cost is an inability to tell meaningless choices from meaningful ones; the risk of making a bad choice is all on us (no opportunity to blame the guy who sold us it); and that combination leads to choice paralysis.
Agreed. I'm far more interested in the intranet of things than the internet of things.
Url changed from http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/this-1985-rand-paper-on-the-f..., which points to this.
I do love how counterintuitive sample sizes are. I swear I see the "it's intuitively obvious that 45 people is a comically small sample size, the researcher is an idiot and this is useless!" comments all the time. Then somebody does the math and it turns out p ≈ 0
Not necessarily. In this case, OP values the commute more. What if it's a tossup between a 10 minute commute with no backyard and 25 minute commute with a backyard with two trees to put a hammock on. Maybe in that case, OP would take a longer commute to get a shady backyard.

I think that's why the logic is fallacious - it only works for a specific question phrased in a specific way.
That's totally different. They didn't test a whole bunch of people a whole bunch of times. That's what the lottery is. That's different math.
Then how is it a solution?

Also, the pie is fixed.
They have a collaboration with the Broad where they want to run their analysis pipeline on Google's compute cluster.

https://cloud.google.com/genomics/gatk?hl=en

They also have a project with Novartis (I think not with NIBR however) to do glucose testing via contact lenses.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/05/us-novartis-ceo-id...

If I have to guess, I don't think Google plan to build a HTS facility for drugs R&D or a huge lab foot-print to do wet-lab work. They probably want to leverage their existing compute/engineering infrastructure to get involved in the next phase of informatics needs in health care and life science (e.g., cloud storage and compute needs for clinical genome sequencing, analysis workflows like 23andMe for academia/industry/clinical).