skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Short answer: Absolutely. Why ? Because many people are already doing it (including me).

It all comes down to the path you take to get there. The destination is totally possible. The path will determine whether you are able to get there or not.

Write down 5 of your best ideas on paper or wherever. Then leave it for a few days. If you think of a new idea someday, go back to that old list and check if that idea was already something you wrote before. Give it an extra point. Rinse and repeat until you realize that you keep coming back to one idea more than others. Pick that one. Of course, you could already believe strongly in an idea and then you don't ned to do all this.

Next step is to build a prototype of this idea. If you can build a web app yourself, then do it using the language/framework you are comfortable with. DO NOT think about whether this is the right language/framework. IT DOES NOT MATTER AT THIS TIME. Heck, use Wordpress to patch a bare minimum working prototype if you really need to. But you need to get something out there. Something that is not in your head but something concrete. It does not have to be pretty or slick. Trust me. The other side of it is that you will NEVER release something and that is worse than releasing garbage.

Work on getting traction on this. I don't know how to tell you every possible way to achieve this as this is where the real challenge is.

Once you get decent enough traction, then you can choose to quit your job if you can afford to do that. Save, save save. If you want to have another partner/help, think about getting that person on board. Or may be you want to remain solo. that is fine for the type of business you asked about.

Then you know what comes next ?Just fuckin quit your job!! I did that. Yes, you can do that. There will NEVER be a right time to do it. If you are ready, you are ready. Otherwise you are never ready. Don't think about what you will lose by quitting your job. That is small compared to what you may be gaining. But be ready to lose it all. Have that spirit. You will do fine.

All the best.
Because where I come from, we use the English equivalent of "into" rather than "times". "5 into 3" roughly translates to "5, 3 times".

The meta-point here is that English (or any other language) is crap for math, which is why we use mathematical notation. And this bullcrap syllabus is trying to redefine the "x" operator, which gets my goat.
The hacker actually has incentive to fulfill their end of the bargain. If they didn't, the victim might go public with this, and then no one would ever pay the ransom.

The hacker wants to be trustworthy here so that new victims will be more likely to pay the ransom because they believe they will actually get their data back.
Racial disparity in the system is like global warming: there's lots of evidence which you have to work hard not to see.

You could start with, eg http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=349... and its references and footnotes. Footnote 4 contains the surprising sentence:

"Very
few
whites
were
charged
with
crimes
in
the
Superior
Court
of
the
District
of
Columbia.
I
was
a
public
defender
for
twelve
years
and
carried
a
full
caseload
for
six
years.
I
represented
only
two
white
defendants
during
those
years.
The
exper-
iences
of
my
colleagues
were
very
similar"
This is pretty neat, but I think that it is somewhat rigged by using a preselected pitch set for the sound. This sounds good for the same reason that a tuned wind chime sounds good - certain sounds go well together regardless of the order they are played in.
I don't see how you can call 1 case an emerging phenomenon. More over that there haven't been any other cases since.

I don't think we should be afraid, as the OP mentioned, of coyotes stalking our children in the parks because of one isolated incident.
1 * n = n
m * n = (m-1) * n + n
> To fund the project, Dotcom said the company will be conducting a seed round in January. Once the prototype is ready, he will also undertake a massive equity crowdfunding campaign.

He wants to do what Ethereum and Maidsafe did -- create a crypto-asset, drive up demand by publicity, and then sell it.
Cats are neurotic and are probably trying to kill you
The Guide to Cuba, a Ruby Micro Framework
How to underclock an iPhone
"Quora is a knowledge-sharing community that depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something."

I just cannot stand with Quora keep asking me to continue with Facebook or google. If majority of users in Quora are based on people who obey dictatorship from Quora, then probably it is not the place for true knowledge.
In practice the ransomers do exactly what they offer to do. Most of them are part of one of a very small group of criminal organizations. The Russian mob is making 10s of millions or 100s of millions a year on this. Why would you not fulfil your end of the bargain.
First off, that is an excellent comment and again, I love Hacker News. How many communities on the planet will have a Rudyard Kipling poem in their lead comment???

I would have used this stanza as I think it's a little more applicable in this situation:

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,

No matter how trifling the cost;

For the end of that game is oppression and shame,

And the nation that plays it is lost!"

As another commenter said, individuals can prevent themselves from being victimized again by starting a regime of proper backups. It isn't as ideal as arresting the motherfuckers and sentencing them to 25 years in federal prison, but it prevents an individual from being labelled a mark.

On the other hand, when the FBI says 'just pay it', I'd argue that it makes all of North America more vulnerable. The end of this game is oppression and shame, and the nation that plays it is lost.
I don't think "merge sort vs. insertion sort" is a good analogy in this case. This seems more like the teacher is deducting points because of a wrong indentation or brace style.
Quora: What are the best-kept secrets of great programmers?
Did you read the article? He's not proposing a solution, beyond using the words "blockchain" and "encryption".
I suspect the fine print will eventually be outlawed for use on the average consumer (unless we radically increase the education of the average consumer). It is well established by now that today's average consumer lacks the reading comprehension level required to fully understand these fine print agreements.
> The point is that because the 5 is first, as everyone can see, it has a specific job in the repeated addition technique.

Um, this is sophistry. The question asked for "5 x 3" using repeated addition. The x is a very well defined mathematical operator and "repeated addition" has a very well-defined meaning, and the child has demonstrated it by repeatedly adding 5 three times.

Yes, the child's cardinal sin is he Did Not Do As He Was Taught(tm), but seriously, that's more the teacher's and the school board's problem in my book, not the child's.
And get in trouble for not applying the government-mandated grading guide fairly to all students?
Maybe, maybe not; I'm not sure.

But I am sure that a student who understands and can apply a specific process when required as well as produce a correct result is better off than one who can only produce a correct result.

Obviously I don't think that all of school should be rote application of techniques. But I've found that when you want to make sure your students have learned a specific technique, you sometimes have to create a somewhat artificial request. Have you taught enough to have found otherwise?
Punishing students who are ahead is an excellent way to make all students equally disinterested. (Oh, but not equivalently disinterested.)

The question is whether the student knows about commutativity of multiplication or if he/she didn't understand what was taught or made a mistake.

Personally, I think the problem here is that math is taught as processes rather than as concepts.
They want you to sign in with Facebook or Google and that = dictatorship? Please.

If you don't want to sign in don't use it. They obviously gain enough value out of having users logged in that it's worth losing those who won't.

The vast majority of people outside of HN don't care.
Nope, I'm not a teacher.

(I tutored math in college and did have the experience of helping people understand math...)
Um, isn't the reason we have an FBI is to shut down operations such as these? Can't they track payments and have the ransomware operators apprehended, with cooperation from authorities in other countries?

Maybe we should defund the FBI if this is the best advice they can think of.
This is 100% BS.

The FBI has already confirmed this "just pay the ransom" was completely misquoted and taken out of context.

Stop spreading this clickbait FUD.
That statement means nothing, without defining what "resources" means and without saying whatever you are trying to insinuate.
It's not an idea. He has no theoretical underpinning. He would have to luck out and hire someone smart enough to actually make something resembling his promises, and then let go of his ego enough to let them do it. Not going to happen, and no amount of capital will help.
i find it fascinating that you could stand the trial against accusation of witchcraft and win it; this makes the middle ages much more liberal than the totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century; so progress is not that progressive - if you look at it in the long run ...
Ask HN: Could Node.js overtake Spring/JEE in the enterprise?
I've looked at and played around with NodeJS and aside from holding my nose while messing in the JavaScript; I can't see it being taken seriously by any high tech company or enterprise. When Java came out, the same was said about it yes I saw its potential immediately. I don't get that feeling not about JavaScript certainly and therefore not about NodeJS.
Not in the long-term, because then they gain a reputation as someone not to be "trusted". Many of these outfits have their own support forums, make it easy to pay, etc and happily hand your data back over because they make money in volume, not from one particular mark. You gain a reputation as being easy to work with and unlocking data and offering the support to do so, many more people will pay just to get rid of the headache when their computers are locked down.
>The point is that because the 5 is first, as everyone can see, it has a specific job in the repeated addition technique.

If you(royal-you) insist that the 5 being the first factor has a specific job and you teach such nonsense to a child, it means you're not teaching actual mathematics.

In _real_ math, the factors/mutiplicands have no notion of ordinal rank such as "first" or "second" or "specific jobs". Even if the child was not formerly taught The Commutative Law, it's not impossible for him to see multiplication tables[1]. (In fact, many are hung as big posters in elementary classrooms.) Any child with pattern recognition abilities beyond a chimpanzee would notice that the cells of XY have the same answer as YX. He/she would ask mom/dad/teacher "is xy always same as yx?".

In the world of _pseudo_ math that stresses bizarre hoop jumping, we overlay non-mathematical concepts such as "specific job" to factors. Maybe this skill is important and transferable to the enlisted man to make sure he makes his bed before cleaning his machine gun instead of the other way around so everyone in the squad doesn't get punished with 50 pushups. But don't pass it off as "teaching math."

[1]https://www.google.com/search?q=multiplication+table&es_sm=9...
Man I was really sad that the link to the sock con was down and the writeup on the other programmer's visit to said con was missing. Anyone else been to a sock con?
This doesn't strike me as a problem. Large companies also shut down initiatives and projects, and everyone knows that startups are inherently risky, because they don't have a business model yet.
In this case, I believe both of you are wrong. The ability to blindly conduct ransom en masse changes the calculus.

First, the ransomers have every incentive to actually abide by their promise to decrypt. In essence, they're running a business. Whereas in a kidnapping situation, ransoms are high ransomers tend to stay anonymous, and risk is high, with ransomware the monetary amounts involved are low, the ransomers typically conduct their actions under an established pseudonym, and the risk in upholding their side of the bargain is low. If they were to not hold up their end of the bargain and it became known that "LeetSquad" doesn't actually decrypt data, victims would stop paying. This would be a disaster.

Furthermore, while it's correct that a victim who pays signals their ease of being shaken down, again, the economics of the situation work in the victim's favor. These attacks aren't targeted. Given an effectively endless supply of potentially-paying victims, direct targeting is unnecessary, wasted effort. And again, risk of reputational damage is high. For evidence, look no further than this FBI recommendation!

For further evidence, consider the fact that in practice, these groups overwhelmingly keep their promises and don't appear to specifically re-target previous victims. They even, no joke, have online support staff who will work with you in the event of difficulties unlocking your data!

I had the idea once that one way to combat these groups would be to run a PR and news campaign attempting to convince the general population that ransomware groups will take the money and run, and that they'll just come after you again. Even if it isn't true, a successful campaign might do some serious damage to their profit margins.
Then we can only conclude, the syllabus is teaching nonsense. They are structuring things that don't need (and shouldn't be) structured; they are instilling fake rules in plastic young minds that will take enormous effort to unlearn later.

Math is important. Teaching some witchcraft-inspired rote math is destructive to real learning.

And rectangles exist regardless of how you view them. If I approach your desk and see the rectangle from the side, its the same rectangle. Even from a corner. Even in a mirror, its the same rectangle.
It's been shown that price signals work only in the environment with perfect information and rational actors, but then the price is superfluous!

That's a nonsensical argument so I doubt it's been "shown" by anyone. Price signals work better as the rationality and level of informedness of participants goes up, this should be obvious. But it isn't true that you must have perfect information or else prices are entirely useless.

What's more, even if you do have ideal and perfectly informed actors, you still need prices. The perfect information is spread out amongst many peoples heads, thus requiring some sort of highly scalable gathering and spreading mechanism (like prices), and even perfectly informed people can still reach different judgements about the relative importance of things. The phenomenon of two people who are clearly experts in a subject vigorously disagreeing with each other is commonplace. So even if you could genetically engineer an economy of telepaths, you'd still need prices to resolve differences in personal perceptions of importance.

Ballot-box style voting is not a replacement for markets. You can't literally hold a nationwide vote every time someone wants to buy a loaf of bread, it's too inefficient and anyway, what would the vote say? A much more effective voting mechanism is that you get some "votes" and then can cast them in a kind of auction to get what you want ..... oh, seems we ended up back at prices. Which are in a sense highly democratic.
When this sets precedence, the possibilities for customers to defend their rights will be largely diminished.

One further step in direction to almighty international corporations and right-less countries and people. Already, many countries are regularly blackmailed by the big corporations.

The TTIP proceedings are also controlled by the industry lobbyists -- that is the reason, that those are kept so secret, that even the parliaments of EU countries are not allowed access to the data. With such regulations like TTIP, the possibilities to abolish customer laws in the countries will be also largely enlarged.
I presume they are probably in US. Hence a fix might be to do a deal with Obama?

really?

If you have any evidence about authors, you can report to local police who will contact with Interpol and then Russia's police. Russia has all necessary laws to punish cyber criminals.
I was really excited to read about offheap, but I'm disappointed that you make sacrifices in memory safety by using it.

I'm so excited by Rust's memory management, but Scala just have so many nice features, especially in multithreading. I hope Rust will catch up, eventually.
Yuppi: Snapchat for Crowds
'Super Mario Bros.' has become a test bed for AI research
I recommend commenting where there are comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10483024
I wouldn't have big problem with the free market (as you describe), if the following big feedback loop of investing would be limited:

People can "cheat" (for example give incomplete information, or mislead about how much stuff they have really done, etc.) and then for that, they get more votes about what is socially useful activity? Of course they will reinvest those points into more what they are doing, and at the end of the day, you will end up with people like that controlling the economy.

And that's what actually happens - owners of capital decide by huge margin where to invest, because accumulation of capital gives you a leverage which just doing normal work doesn't. It also happens to a lesser extent between other social groups.

Now, I see two realistic solutions to this loophole:

- Limit personal wealth to some amount (say 100x average) and redistribute the rest.

- Limit amount of overall wealth (let's say GDP) than can be subject of competition to a certain percentage (say 50%) and redistribute the rest.

These are essentially proposals for having a mixed economy.

> any centrally planned system will be inefficient

Is democracy central planning or not? I don't think "central planning" is particularly useful category, to be honest. All larger-scale human activities have to be done by cooperation of many people, and this cooperation can be always viewed as central planning, or at least as place where individual values are suppressed.
What I understand flexible to mean is "serving 99% of use case scenarios". Arguably Photoshop does this, Instagram does not. Or maybe a better analogy is Photoshop vs Photoshop Elements, which probably only servers 80% of use case scenarios. Or Chrome OS (80% of desktop use case scenarios) vs Windows (99.9%).
Actually, in this day and age, its pretty simple to do (take a vote on the price of bread) - just an app. The time for modeling economies around middle-ages village markets is past. We do have good (not perfect) information; we can act rationally.
Only 14 years too late.
Exactly. Any other moral code will initiate the use of force.
Why distributed workforces will win
These two articles each spent a day on the front page of Reddit:

http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2007/02/two-weeks-vaca...

http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2008/05/laid-off-one-t...

As you can see from the rest of the blog, my internet fame lasted the better part of a week. And it seems I said everything interesting that I had to say during the course of that one year.

Recently, I've started writing again about the mechanics of how to run a software company while traveling. I figure I've been doing it long enough that I should have accumulated some good knowledge by now.
There are dozens or hundreds of patents in force on in app purchases. [0] It's impossible to write any non-trivial software without infringing hundreds of US software patents. And as long as there are software patents, it will always be that way.

[0] warning: obnoxious autoplay video http://www.x-plane.com/x-world/lawsuit/
>> I think this is a strange way of looking at things. What non-trivial protocol doesn't have known design limitations?

It's still a weakness, not a feature, and when a blockchain is not a monetary thing the pressures and incentives to run infrastructure will be different, it's hard to say that a 50% attack won't be possible or desirable in that circumstance.

>> Moreover, what could you possibly hope for in addition to a self-mitigating limitation, i.e: a theoretical limit that doesn't matter in practice?

It's not theoretical though, pools have got there with BTC. There are incentives not to obviously mess with the currency at that point but perhaps subtle ways to operate to your own benefit could happen at that point.
I don't know that it's about reading comprehension. I think most consumers could understand them if they put the effort in.

The problem is simply that people don't read this stuff in the first place. They simply sign without reading, assuming/hoping/praying that the terms are reasonable.

And really, can you blame them? Contracts are so vastly overused and they're made with the assumption that the consumer isn't going to read them. Most companies won't give you a two-page contract if a twenty-page contract will do. Many contracts are excessively long and are part of a sales process built on speed that assumes nobody will take the time to read before signing.

I would like to see a change in how contracts are handled, such that if one side knows the other side didn't read before signing, the contract is void. That wouldn't take care of everything (American Express's contract is probably handled by mail, so they can reasonably expect you to read the contract at leisure in your home before you sign) but it would put a stop to abusive situations in retail, where they had you a bunch of paperwork to sign. If they had to actually watch you and make sure you read it all before signing, the contracts would probably become a lot shorter. If people got used to reading the things, then it might even change their habits for other scenarios like doing stuff through the mail.

However, I also think it is completely insane that contracts are allowed to put any restrictions on either party's access to courts. The whole point of courts is to be the arbiter when something goes wrong. A clause saying that you must use some third-party arbitration service instead of the courts, or a clause saying that you agree not to participate in class-action lawsuits, should be completely unenforceable, just like a clause that says you agree to become the other party's slave.
Android and Chrome OS may be combined as early as next year
Sorry to disappoint you but I am just making wild guesses. You don't need to be an expert in technology to invest in technology companies. After all those "unicorns" earning tons of money for their early investors, I don't think a cartel would be any less intrigued than ordinary rich people.
This is great, and maybe every ToS should have a plain English version next to it?

Shopify does this wonderfully: https://www.shopify.com/legal/terms
Rent Control Is a Terrible Idea