skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/03/12/mozilla-and-epic-pr...
The training thing is addressed in the article, as near as historians can tell when facing soviet pilots the kill ratio was 1.4 to 1 (favouring the Sabre) but rose to 9:1 when flying against non-soviet pilots.

> The Mig-29, SU-27 and on are solid first class fighters and probably have the edge on the F-16 and F-15.

As a pure dog fighting aircraft possibly but as an air intercept fighter I think the F15 (with the except of the F22 and the EF2000) is still the thing to beat.
There’s One Thing Volkswagen Can Do to Stop the Bleeding: Beat Tesla
What about the video backgrounds on webpages? Haven't seen them the last 8 months or so compared to early 2014 when everyone from Spotify to web agencies used them
You can tax owning properties you don't live in then or buying them in the first place.
Probably because in recent years MB uses Renault engines.
Law of Demeter with Rails
Wasn't deskilling the thing people complained about with new technologies?
>* Rounded corners
>* Gradients on buttons
>* Text shadows
>* Superfluous drop shadows

Basically all of those were replace by "flat design" stuff right?
In general democracies are not great for architectural experimentation in large scale. There are too many veto players and experimentation must be aligned with investors short-term values/interest (AKA public or private money will only be spent if somebody will get fast gains from that investment, being it cash or advertisement).

In pro-totalitarian regimes, ideals are the most important. If architects don't diverge from that ideals, they have carte blanche to experiment.

E.g. Frank Gehry eccentricity is chosen mostly for the advertisement that will bring to the development. Even so, FB headquarters amount of experimentation is minimal. High level of experimentation is costy, risky and the potential reward would be minimal.
> The Latin word for beard, barba, -ae, provides the root for the Latin and English equivalent of ‘barbarian’.

From what I can tell, that's not the generally accepted etymology. Wikipedia's "Barbarian" page says:

> Eventually the term found a hidden meaning by Christian Romans through the folk etymology of Cassiodorus. He stated the word barbarian was "made up of barba (beard) and rus (flat land); for barbarians did not live in cities, making their abodes in the fields like wild animals".

Wikipedia gives this as the primary etymology and it's the one I've heard most often:

> The Ancient Greek word βάρβαρος (barbaros), "barbarian", was an antonym for πολίτης (politēs), "citizen" (from πόλις - polis, "city-state"). The sound of barbaros onomatopoetically evokes the image of babbling (a person speaking a non-Greek language).
European countries pay large amount of subsidies for art..
All those that believe democracy is an overall good supposedly believe in the benefit of the majority, all those that are socialist believe that benefit to society is important - those two categories probably account for a majority of the population of the world.

It is often remarked that capitalism is a beneficial regime because of the "trickle down effect" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics).

>So if society is comprised of 10 people, and you devour one of them and redistribute to the other 9, thats OK simply because the 9 recipients benefit? //

That doesn't benefit all of society now does it?

>If you can gang up and rob your own rich, why not arm up and attack a neighboring country and enslave its population? //

Attacking a neighbouring country won't benefit society it will be a substantial detriment as would enslaving members of society.

The thing about "rob[bing] your own rich" is that the many of the richest members of our societies [in the UK] are rich because of chance, because of rent seeking, because despite the world belonging to mankind they by violence [usually of their ancestors] have acquired a larger share of it's resources. Why is it unjust to redistribute such wealth?

Let's flip your first question - if society is composed of 10 people and one of them has enough food to feed 10, should we just let 9 starve so that the 1 can keep "his" portion? Or to look at it a different way: how about we look at an island that's got resources to feed them all, they each are provided a random share and one has the most fertile and productive part - they all work equally hard and he always has excess and grows fat and rich in resources whilst the others suffer to varying degrees. Why should the benefit born of random chance overrule our humanity?

"We find that increasing the income share of the poor and the middle class actually increases growth while a rising income share of the top 20 percent results in lower growth—that is, when the rich get richer, benefits do not trickle down." (Dabla-Norris et al., http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=42986.0)

[FWIW I don't agree that GDP is the best measure of improvements in society but it at least appears to indicate the efficiency - within humanitarian bounds - of a capitalist system. I'd prefer to follow happiness quotients.]
What makes you think I will try to constructively respond to your question if you dont try to constructively respond to mine?
The problem with subresource integrity is that it ties you to one version of the code. That's fine for something like jQuery, but doesn't work in this case where you expect the code to change relatively frequently.
(and I don't hate my job btw, there is a lot of technical challenge in what I do. Creating a wel performing system for milions of customers is a big puzzle to be solved.

I just can't stand corporate environment with way to much untalented people in to expensive suits acting being busy and important :)
Star Trek uses "subspace communication" for faster than light messages http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Subspace_communication
Yes I mentioned those further up the thread. Childcare is unaffordable for workers who can be replaced by most people.

or if one is a worker especially valued by the economy, such as one of a few nuclear scientists or doctor or software engineer.
The dividends are why people create and invest in companies in the first place.

Also, dividends aren't just burned. People can consume them or re-invest.
You better move to a tax haven.
Probably true. The f15 has shot down a satellite, landed without one of it's wings, and has never lost a fight. Not bad for something that first flew 43 years ago.
This isn't much different from whether a $2m supercar is really much "better" as a car than a $500k one. It doesn't really matter as long as the buyer perceives the value/exclusivity/aesthetics.
Ask HN: No more feedback friday at Show HN?
What happened to Kevin's FF? It's a great learning experience reading the reviews. I bet it's worth a couple bars of gold for project owners.

Are there plans to bring it back?

Ex: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9748308
Beautiful craftsmanship and perceived value I think.

I use an old pair of Wharfedales I was given along with an old yamaha amp as my primary PC speakers and they are truly excellent compared to any dedicated computer set I've ever used, so much so when they eventually break I'll probably hunt down a second hand set to replace them rather than computer speakers.
Human Cost Rises as Old Bridges, Dams and Roads Go Unrepaired
Intro to product design
I'd estimate that sound quality improves up to a few thousand dollars per speaker, after that you're pretty much paying for aesthetics and the brand. Professionals tend to use active monitors from companies like Genelec.
That's just a standard software consulting. Lots of clients wouldn't mind you open sourcing what you worked on for them.
we might discover a method of "subspace" communication if we observe a more advanced civilisation using it.
I think achieving step 1 of even finding intelligent life is good enough for most people. We can work on the comms later.
>"The UBI is not only a subsidy to employers; it is a union-buster." (???)

This is true. This is also the main reason why I support UBI in Finland.

Here unions are based on negotiating minimum wages for different jobs and paying unemployment money to laid of workers. (something like 9 months after lay off, then it's government responsibility.) The membership payments are tax exempt. Both of these things would be unnecessary with UBI.

Why I don't like the unions? Because cleaning lady at paper factory gets 1,6 times the wage of cleaning lady at a hospital. They are practically fueling outsourcing more than anything else, because they penalize success.

Also because whatever I vote in the general election, is not going to affect the job market in any way. Unions hold the power. They have cartel on labor and it's not illegal like other cartels.

They have that cartel because they lobby shit more than anything else. It makes economic sense to belong to union. Your payments cost you nothing because government is basically paying them through tax exemption. If you have slightest possibility to be ever laid off, unions guarantee relatively high standard of living for that "in between jobs".

Finnish social democrats are most against UBI in Finland. They have been accused of being the political wing of Unions.
Negative income tax is a very slick mechanism for implementing a basic income. The administrative infrastructure is already in place, and it's very easy to tweak the tax code so that only poor people are net beneficiaries - you just nudge the standard deduction or the rate.

$385bn is a big scary number. Transferring $100/person/mo from the top 10% to the bottom 10% of earners via taxation is perfectly straightforward.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax
three body problem is somewhat based on this idea
This is what I was thinking. Once you hit a certain price bracket for speakers (about £1000?) you hit diminishing returns hard.

The whole 'audiophiles use music to listen to their equipment instead of using their equipment to listen to their music' springs to mind.
OP here are some references that may help you. The first is to assess your stengths and find a career that supports your stengths. Then work on making your stengths stonger. Think about a good baseball batter. Improving their batting average 20% makes them a great batter.

I have used SF in my own life,, with the teams I have managed and with some life coaching customers. If you want to know better how to use it send me an email eric [at] ericfplamer [dot] com

These two ted videos are also useful for 1) thinking differntly about happiness and 2) thinking differently about genius.

http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_seligman_on_the_state_of_psy...

http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius
But they can teach both good and _bad_ things.
A Deepness in the Sky deals with interstellar traders that do not have FTL.

The universe the book is set in has a gimmick to allow FTL, but that book doesn't use FTL (part of the gimmick is that it isn't possible in much of the galaxy).

Edit: The Revelation Space books also have lots of people moving between stars at below light speed.
Uh, the lack of email was an omission - fixed.

I worked for the past few years on making PyPy & satellite projects more business friendly. We've established a company (baroquesoftware.com), I went to conferences, advertised it etc. Granted, I'm not the right person to do the job - I'm generally a technically-oriented nerd. The community is welcoming for both commercial interest and newcomers and if there are hiccups, we're trying to fix them. This is not an easy project to get your hands dirty, we definitely don't need extra barriers to entry, for example it's extremely easy to get a commit bit on pypy.

There are some spectacular success stories, but even Django had a hard time raising money for someone to work full time on fixing bugs, while noone doubted usefulness of that. Now PyPy is far less successful than django, but it does save companies tons of money.

I would welcome advice/help/whatever in how we can make PyPy more commercial friendly in a way that brings revenue - I'm not interested in making businesses happy for free all that much.
That's not dealing with the limitation, it is pretending that it doesn't exist.
I don't think it's glossed over. It's a separate issue though.

Just knowing for certain that there is intelligent life - or any life - on other worlds would have huge ramifications for how humanity views itself and the universe.

It would be interesting to see how major religions responded to confirmation that there is other intelligent life that is not made in the same image as us.

Do aliens go to Heaven?
UILayoutGuide: Auto Layout Helper View
Blockchains: The great chain of being sure about things
Wander – find travel destinations according to your budget
> if you believe nothing can exceed the speed of light then even if we find intelligent life we will never communicate in any meaningful sense of the word.

Quantum entanglement could very plausibly allow for superluminal communication. Yes, I know that it isn't proven, or even considered plausible as yet, but call me an optimist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superluminal_communication
I like the way you see the future. What is your response to the argument that UBI will need to be paid for by inordinate taxes on the few actually productive firms/individuals, in which case those firms/individuals will be incentivised to leave, leading to a deadened, unproductive country subsidising laziness?
Windows 3.0 takes on MacOS (1990)
This article is terrible.

For all the numbers and percentages it throws around it just doesn't do the sums on the basics. From the article's facts:

- 3 teacher for 19 children - 6.3 children per carer.

- Cost = 15% of median income

- lets assume 1.5 children per family.

- 6.3/1.5 =4.2 child carers per family.

- 4.2 carers X 15% of median family income = a revenue of 63% of family income per child care worker.

Assuming overheads, profits, etc., .... you get the point. Child care is expensive and low paying for similar reasons. It takes a lot of teachers per student. This isn't a government conspiracy or a corporate one, it's just the reality of the requirements of caring for children.
A little meta:

We live in the future; a town I've never heard of in the middle of Australia, and 30 seconds later I can see a map of it, view aerial photography, and read about its history and its surroundings. I've been reading about the Simpson desert and other geography of the area.

My little group's lunch conversation earlier in the week started with "How much would you pay, in 1985, to have the iPhone in your pocket with similar network access to that period's knowledge?" Opinions varied; intrinsic knowledge is interesting, but a lot of the interesting stuff involves access to people. It might be little more than a novelty.

But it's easy to forget how fast and accessible things are today. When I was 10 my parents bought our family an encyclopedia, a significant amount of money for knowledge that was of high quality, and readily accessible by walking across our living room, but years out of date. For anything better you had to drive across town to the library, when it was open, and hit the stacks.

I'm not sure that fast-and-vast is always compelling (the downside? you chase trivia and entertainment a lot, probably). But if I'd had StackOverflow in 1985 . . .
But why somebody else need to pay for that?

What will happen with dirt-cheap home when UBI will be denied to it owner?

Do _you_ want to pay someone $500 just because?
There have been a number of such works. Olaf Stapledon's Starmaker takes a somewhat poetic approach to the idea. And restraining oneself to an Einsteinian universe where nothing exceeds C was a hallmark of "hard-sci-fi" although even Arthur C. Clarke fudged and went for hyperspace when the plot was otherwise going to drag for a few millennia.

For a more recent take on the topic check out Karl Schroeder's Permanence [1] which is a damn fine read and doesn't run the hyperspace cheat and is all the more operatic for that.

1. http://amzn.to/1LYhwwm
My experience from being in a mixed-class grade school was that the older kids punch you.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/2euh84/instant_...
With that logic social democratic Nordic countries should already suffer from immense inflation. But you don't take into account the taxation, which alone would cause about equal amount of deflation.
While your general idea is correct, the way you communicate it is needlessly rude and contrarian.

The better way would be to answer, that yes, surely you will help, but there doesn't seem to be a valid M&S contract in force and that you will gladly discuss specifics with them, if they are interested.

See? That's the talk the managers understand, they don't work for free either. So it is either an important thing they need to fix and will work with you, or it is not and in that case you will not waste your time. The simple thing is, that you need to recognize when they exert pressure on you and then simply mind your own interests.
These aren't even monstruosities. Compared to actual social-architectural catastrophies they're cute.

There's a few stuff that went very very bad in this era of urban growth, and Le Corbusier was only part of it. If you look at his first big 'bar' in Marseille, cite radieuse, it was an acceptable concept, spacious hallways, carefully designed flats, with good lighting, good thermal thinking. Then you have national projects that took the idea of 1000s of people in a small land surface and removed all the actual individual value and beauty. It was all cramped and low-cost. Industrialization of social structures, that went sour pretty fast. Even though, based on the ads of the day, they truly believed in doing good and being correct in their proposal.
pks are sequential. If you sign up as 1992 they have 1992 customers.
I had a similar conversation recently where I heard a great summary - price increases asymptotically as quality improves. It seems to be quite an accurate summary.
Just because someone is at a physical work location doesn't mean they are working so I'm not sure why people are so hung up on spying on remote workers.

Think about how many useless meetings and other distractions physical workers go through in a day. You'd be fortunate to get 2-3 hours of actual work done in an 8 hour work day but no one seems to mind that you end up paying an employee for their 40 hours a week + benefits/etc.. Yet you have some freelance sites and people wanting remote workers to screenshare their entire working day or take random screenshots?

This is also one reason why billing by the week or by project is a good idea.

Spoiler alert: I do remote consulting work pretty often but I don't rip off my clients by telling them I worked 6 hours while billing them for 10 however you'll often find me sitting at a screen browsing for music or reading blog posts because I work best in short bursts of highly focused sessions with small breaks in between.

If I had a client request one of those "spy on me all day" pieces of software I'm pretty sure I wouldn't even bother responding to him, even if the contract was a sure thing because I feel like anyone who is interested in such a thing is going to most likely end up being a terrible client.
Amazing post, thanks for the openness.

As I get older (I'm still 33), I realize more and more that almost nobody got their stuff together. Most people even in their 40 or 50 are still trying to figure out what to do with their lifes. They change careers, move to a different state, start writing books, start some business different from what they have done their entire life.

When I was young, I always heard that 'life is hard'. I live in a third world country, grew from a poor family and never had much money. But it wasn't until I was married working in a good company that I realized what that means.

I realized that life being hard is not about not having money or a family... these are struggles we all have. Life being hard is all about these choices you have to keep making that are not confortable at all, you can never rest, life is always changing your plans. Even when you think you have it all figured out, this will last only a few years and you will have to start again.

It's all part of life. We all have struggles and the sooner we realize that it's all about the journey and not about the ends, the easier it gets to go on.
Yes, it is me.

Also, there is no place left I can buy that band's music. Their CDs are all out of print. Spotify was literally the only way I could give them revenue besides going to their shows, and they are on a different continent now.
Autoprefixer 6.1 is out with CSS-in-JS and :read-only support
Nonsense.

This is a particular and unusual case where specialising does not improve efficiency much. Cooking and cleaning are similar. It still improves efficiency by 100% or more (most of that being the tax man's cut), not by that orders of magnitudes in other products of services.
I got this error on Firefox (43.0 beta 1)

TypeError: el.style.WebkitTransform is undefined
The thing about "rob[bing] your own rich" is that the many of the richest members of our societies [in the UK] are rich because of chance, because of rent seeking, because despite the world belonging to mankind they by violence [usually of their ancestors] have acquired a larger share of it's resources. Why is it unjust to redistribute such wealth?

Can you categorically say all of the richest in your country are rich because of chance and rent seeking?

Even if yes, can you categorically say all of the richest in your country are rich because of their exploitation of British people? Or did some of them rich because of their ancestors exploitation of India or through the Chinese opium trade?

I get what you're saying with not letting the 9 people starve, but justifying it by saying "they deserve their stuff taken because they're exploiting us" is the emotional logic that led to holocaust, or the cultural revolution, events where millions are displaced and killed.

Cows & Pigs don't deserve to be murdered for their meat, but we do it, to live.

You got to do it, not because they deserve it, but because it's what you got to do. If you are going to do it, own it.
It's really hard to compare American equipment to most of the Soviet equipment that the US has fought against.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_variants_of_Soviet_mili...
Also many people enjoy spending time around young children.
It is still almost always worse. Storing the mapping on a large device doesn't make sense, when you can store a script online or in a small storage device if internet access is a problem somehow, and it works with every computer that has a standard keyboard. Just like the drivers, script has to be written only once, but has the benefit of sharing with any other user for free without requiring special hardware.

The benefit seems to be low level systems where it is hard to script the key mappings (assuming drivers work). But do you really write your code, i.e. spend a significant percentage of time in them, or in moderns OSs?

As for comfort, buy a ergonomic keyboard that is cheaper and static and will force you to adapt the correct posture. Especially if the problem is the small additional angle required to touch type, those keyboard solve it.
Womens wear
which kind of dresses apt for womens plz suggest?
How can freelancers and entrepreneurs stay productive at work?
This is pretty much it, the last time I touched assembly was to write some string routines for Delphi 5 as the included ones where horribly slow, that was 16 years ago.

Since these days I'm a web developer I'm at a level in the stack where using Assembly would be alien and frankly I doubt I could anyway without some serious study.
René Girard, a French-born thinker on faith, culture and war
> I don't think there is an easy solution to this, at least as long as "intellectual property" exists. However abolishing IP would be digital communism and many people are for whatever reason adverse to that idea.

Isn't the BSD licence pretty close to a situation without IP?