skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> That's how business is done in places like Russia and China and in many very poor countries. Displease the government and face the full force of state power regardless of actual laws.

Not at all. I'm suggesting the legislative process be used. You're inferring that trade protectionism is totalitarian rule. Seriously? Citizens and their quality of life is more important than you business and its profits. Full stop.

> I prefer being subject to laws and having recourse to a legal system where i am allowed to challenge even the behavior of the government.

But you are. If you operate in a country, you're subject to its laws. You have recourse under the legal system, and recourse for its legislation if you are a citizen and have a vote.

> Subjecting corporations to capricious bullying when they do something unpopular is not "protecting citizens" - governments that act like that invariably also abuse individuals the same way.

Today I learned that forcing companies to follow the spirit rather than the letter of the law is "bullying". Makes me found of how China and Russia do business sometimes.
Where was I wrong?

>Do you agree now that if the null hypothesis is true the p-value is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1?

If the null hypothesis is true, the p-value will converge to 1. (This makes complete intuitive sense as well, if you hypothesis is true, every observation you make should/will agree with it, making the ratio of agreeable_observations:total_observations = 1.)

You haven't shown anything where a true null hypothesis uniformly generates p-values between 0 and 1. Perhaps for a single observation you can only get a 0 or 1 value, and, perhaps for a over/under the average test (where every experiment will give 0 or 1) your sequence of p-values for each observation would be uniformly distributed, but p-values are generally computed as a normalized sum over many observations, in which case the value should converge to 1 if the null hypothesis is true.

One unintuitive aspect is that you might expect p-value to converge to 0 if the null hypothesis is false, however p-value is undefined when the null hypothesis is false.
Even If Terrorists Do Use Strong Encryption, We Still Need It
IE9 remains supported on Vista (as it's the last release of IE that runs on it). IE9/IE11 is all that remains supported on client releases on Windows (Server and Embedded versions of Windows continue to use pretty much everything from IE7 upwards).

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/gp/microsoft-internet-ex... provides a clearer overview of what the supported version where is. (Note that it excludes OSes that are currently supported by end support before 12 Jan 2016.)
I under no circumstances want my probably-not-very-secure peripheral bus accessed by things provided by a matter of course in cafes, libraries, etc. Magsafe is stupid and that is fine by me.

This is also why I carry my own USB adapters rather than relying on others', and have a USB condom (they call them SyncStop now, I think, but that one is big and weird) in my wallet just in case.
Anonymous 'rickrolls' ISIS, hijacking pro-ISIS hashtags with 80's music video
So did you actually read any of the links?

> to make sure Win10 won't phone home

Windows 10 is "Windows as a Service" and is continuously updated from the web, based on telemetry. It also runs on smartphones and games consoles. It includes notifications, cloud (OnDrive) integration and an intelligent assistant (similar to Siri, Google Now and Alexa).
Conjunction fallacy
> For one thing it lowers the bar before people think your indigent.

Have you considered keeping your facial hair washed and groomed.
Where have you been all this time? In prison?
This was what my closing statement was about: sometimes these initiatives have good intentions but miss the mark.

I personally feel like the lack of women due to the culture is more of an engineering thing than a CS thing. I could be wrong, of course, but my experience compared to peers in engineering agrees with your sentiment. Regardless, I think the initiative exists to ensure that the same exclusionary culture doesn't propagate in an already male-dominated field. This may not be the correct execution, but I at least applaud the efforts to make women feel welcomed.
Show HN: Demangler – Demangle gcc identifiers with ease, in Python
Yep once you know "the rules" you can easily analyze all these protests or incidents.
On the ethics of research in robotics, with Raja Chatila
It doesn't seem to be working that way as a deterrent, then, given that the US has an incarceration rate five times higher than it's developed-nation contemporaries (750/100k vs ~100-150/100k population).
Hundred thousands online HTTP and SSH hosts share same private keys
I think they don't see the quotes around the first paragraph.
Box’s Diversity Strategy Could Use Some Work and Transparency
Typically papers have a section called "Materials and Methods".

http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/scientific-papers-1...

Not having seen this part of their paper. I can't really conclude anything, but stay skeptical based on outside prior information.
Scary. Peter isn't a licensed attorney or even a member of the bar. This is not surprising, because on his web page he invites users/clients to break the law, that is, notarizing documents outside the presence of the signer without asking for identification. Oops.

I'm sure that Bitproof, Inc. has a decent start-up forms library, but the organized bar is very jealous of its prerogatives. Like Zenefits selling insurance without using licensed brokers, it's deja vu all over again.
> For example,

> > The horse raced past the barn fell

> should never be written like that.

Surely it can, and must, be so written if the thing past which the horse raced was, as Wikipedia mentions, "the fell by or at the barn"?
If someone attempted to murder you, what do you think would be a suitable punishment for that person? Honest question. If they were in jail for a short amount of time you'd probably be a bit worried that they would come find you after and finish the job.
"There are certain ideas that just don't belong in a university setting because they are bunk and this has nothing to do with diversity of opinion."

I'm sure all of the students getting faculty and administrators dismissed right now would describe the opposing ideas as "bunk" not worthy of consideration.

I see a few reasons to explicitly address "bunk" ideas.

* Students have already been exposed to the ideas, and many already believe them. Having a discussion explaining why they are bunk might be critical to moving on to more interesting topics.

* Appeals to authority make for bad pedagogy. Sure, evolution is the scientific consensus. But students who just accept it at face value without asking to be shown the evidence are not students capable of scientific thought.

* Ideas you thought were bunk might turn out to have more merit or nuance than you expected, once you start digging deeper. It's easy to see other people's deeply held bunk ideas. But how do you force yourself to see your own?
Leave it to psychology to ban pretty much the only scientific tool we have...
Bomb a western country because corporations - in full compliance with its laws and those of the US - are doing something you dont like? Really?

How about the US simply change its tax laws to prevent this happening?
For anyone interested in DSP, the Coursera DSP class is superbly well done: https://www.coursera.org/course/dsp
> Which means you have to accept nominal tax rates of 48%+.

Nonsense. I won't speak for Germany, but our government spends about $500 billion annually on things that can plausibly be called public goods (I exclude defense). This is a mere 4% of total US personal income.
Uber Chases the Perfect Ride with Back-To-Back Trips
Citizens and their quality of life is more important than you business and its profits

What do you think the mechanism for improving quality of life is? Trade.
Those people aren't worth knowing then. Totally disgusting. The fact that an elected member threatened him is even worse!
Who gets to decide which ideas are off limits?
Except for all that javascript.

> CodePen doesn't work very well without JavaScript.
How seldaek works #howiwork
It's the response by the councilman that concerns me.
"Quantum supercomputers promise to be exponentially faster and more powerful than traditional computers, Yu said, and can communicate with immunity to hacking or spying. "

Either Yu or the author of this write-up is wrong. I suspect the author...
I'm pretty sure this is why their experts deem this impossible:

"[x] Display Screen Names [] Display Real Names"

http://docs.townnews.com/kbpublisher/Comment-Manager-Setting...
I wouldn't buy one (I've got two Dell UltraSharps and I'm happy as a clam), but an Apple 27" monitor is also a Thunderbolt dock, most of which retail around $200. It's more expensive than its competitors, but I think that it's merely overpriced instead of exorbitant.
I've never liked appeals to a "silent majority" because it groups everyone who doesn't make their voice heard into a vague group that's assumed to be on the same page. I'm generally silent on these issues, for example, but my stance isn't as simple as "I disagree with those stupid college kids" or "all of you people are so privileged and ignorant."

You definitely got at the thrust of the issue, though. I don't really want to present an opinion that's going to trigger an avalanche of hate that might not even relate to what I'm saying. I don't post the vast majority of the comments I start typing.
I don't know whether "the hot lead the cold" and "the wet tear off their clothes" are made easier, or harder, to parse by the fact that when one (or at least I) reads them, one assigns a pronunciation to the 3rd word en passant. (I picked correctly, as it turned out, so don't know how hard it is to overcome the effect of a wrong choice.)
You're not the bad guy for expressing that discrimination is a problem, you're the bad guy for not doing so eloquently and revealingly.

But discrimination is not inherently a problem, it is only a problem when it leads to bad decision-making, especially in the long term. If I were very short (a factor I cannot control) and I was responsible for reaching high places, it would be discriminatory to deny me the position, but it wouldn't be a problem. There's no mistake reaching such a rational decision, if it is in fact, rational. Which in this case, would imply there is no access to height-boosting equipment or reach-extending tools.

>What I am arguing, however, is that CS is the equalizer, based on your accomplishments, and your accomplishments ARE NOT limited by your starting position.

CS can be an equalizer, but your accomplishments ARE limited by your starting position. Discrimination invalidates accomplishments precisely because it limits your starting position.

>Any single-issue outreach (like gender) is insulting, in that it ignores the rest of the person.

I don't see how that follows. If I build a ladder for short people, am I insulting tall people? Am I ignoring them? Am I reducing them to a number? Or would a tall person be reducing themselves to a number by objecting (needlessly) to the construction of ladders?
I think they're winning because the overall premise is just correct. Black death and torture is one of the most serious moral issues the U.S. faces today.

There are some people with poor impulse control who get in the news a lot. The opposition promotes the hell out of those people (as we are doing right now) in order to try to discredit the leaders. The fact that the movement is still winning despite the countercampaign is because so many of the other people in the movement are extraordinary, grounded people speaking for truth.
My stock retort always is "Well, I find your narrow-mindedness offensive". Questions, logical and calmly asked, also swiftly dismantle those flapping on about misplaced social concerns.

Almost feel sorry for them, like these views are thinly-veiled insecurities about some aspect of themselves or trauma experienced.
This article Haidt links on the sociology of the new culture of victimhood is very insightful: http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-...
So your solution is to make every merger with a foreign entity illegal?
I guess we're holding the phones wrong too.
Look, are you trying to help the bad people spread their bad ideas? You must be on the side of the bad people!
>Since we're not talking about the constitution, which strictly relates to government and public property, then we're talking about private entities and private property.

Except a lot of private entities receive a lot of money from the federal government - either as subsidies, tax breaks or programs. So they should abide by the rules of the government too. Giving public money to entities that not view the first amendment as obligatory for them - that is wrong for me.
> Corporate mergers appear to be an intrinsically available strategy for avoiding an extraterritorial corporate tax system.

...because of legislation and existing tax code allowing it.

> What intervention will your legislative pen impose?

I would have to speak with a legal associate with experience drafting legislation for specific language. The purposes would be to ensure any tax intended to specifically be avoided by a merger would be re-captured (this isn't out of the ordinary; the AMT in the US is specifically designed to disallow certain income tax deductions when a taxpayers income reaches a certain level, to prevent tax avoidance).

My understanding is that the Double Irish Arrangement "loophole" has been closed, but further work needs to be done.
Sorry I didnt mean to suggest that the silent majority has the same views more that the majority is silent, and I wanted to link that maybe they are silent because of the climate of going after people so aggressively for having the wrong brand (problematic) of views/beliefs.

I prefer a society where people can be challenged on their beliefs, when people refuse to have a rational discussion using logic and real facts they are exposing themselves for what they are, hateful.
The Secret of Monkey Island as Play [German]
If you don't pay you country club membership, your membership will be terminated. If you then decide to stay on their property you will be almost certainly arrested for trespassing.

Alternative example: if you would barricade yourself inside your local country club with a dog, I can guarantee you they will bust your door down and taze your dog.
> Cloned livestock also increases health risks from reduced genetic variance.

Like, "animal husbandry can manage genetic variation, but cloning can't" ? Doesn't add up. In both cases you can have humans in the loop to make sure sufficiently diverse samples are preserved and used in populations.

All livestock populations should be genetically monitored, anyway.
I think the parent is on to something about the implications of the argument, although it is not how the post's author would look at it, of course.

To really understand an argument, one has to start with its subject. Are we talking about viewpoints or people? What the blog post author focuses on is people:

> Me: Now lets try it for politics. How many of you would say you are on the right politically, or that you are conservative or Republican?

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how discourse is conducted and should be conducted. People are not on the right politically, conservative, or Republican. People are people, and each might hold or articulate viewpoints or opinions that are on the right politically or conservative. They might be a member of the Republican Party. All of these are elective and potentially temporary.

The whole point of discourse is that viewpoints, opinions, and memberships can change. So to start by framing those as elements of identity needing protection, feeds directly into a framework for discussion that is conflicted. If a discussion must validate and protect all viewpoints (conservative or liberal), then what is going to be discussed?

IMO the right way to approach this situation is to explore the potential consequences of voicing an unpopular opinion. Often, they are far less scary than teenagers might suppose. We should focus on how to give each individual student the mental tools to effectively evaluate arguments, and to manage their anxiety about going against perceived social norms.

Teaching kids to be brave in speaking up against prevailing opinion can help create positive outcomes throughout their lives. We want citizens who will speak up for what they know is right, even if they know they will face trouble.
It's so weird. Everything I have by Apple still works and still looks good. But all my Apple data and power cables are held together with Sugru.
> I don't see any more subsequent examples.

There's a fairly non-specific, second-hand example regarding a student which made complaints with an unspecified basis about offensive writings of Mark Twain and Edward Said that preceded the non-renewal of a (different) adjunct professor's contract, which the author relates resulted in the author expunging anything they thought might be perceived as offensive from their syllabus (the author doesn't explain how they "saw" this scenario unfold, and given the usual confidential nature of such contracting decisions, it seems unlikely as someone who was neither the subject nor the decision-maker that the author had the full picture of the discussions or the reason for the decision.)

Everything else is the description of the author's fears about what might happen, and repeating non-specific generalities from other sources.

So, there is one vague subsequent example, but nothing in it actually specifies the basis of the offense and ties it into anything left/liberal (or right/conservative, for that matter). I've seen both left- and right-origin complaints about both Twain and Said (in the latter case, often the exact same complaint, of his perceived-by-some anti-Semitism.)
Not all trade improves quality of life, as I'm sure you're aware.
If you answered the question you'd have seen why it was relevant, but if you'd rather not then allow me to elaborate.

Imagine someone is fascinated by seeing a butterfly moving between the plants in their garden. Does the person own the butterfly? Naturally, it has no allegiance to any person. Can they own the butterfly? The only ownership possible appears to result in the butterfly being held captive, either alive or dead. The captivity robs both the person and the butterfly, the butterfly is robbed of its freedom, and the person is robbed of the joy of seeing the butterfly live naturally, which is what they may have found fascinating in the first place.

This is a hard thing to explain, because it requires a different mindset. If someone is of the ownership mindset then it doesn't matter to them what existed before that ownership, or what happens after their ownership. However, with a less individualistic mindset, different values emerge. For example, is a tree worth more than the paper it can produce?
The problem with focusing on the focus of balanced viewpoints is that it focuses on obvious chaff. People will say, well, we don't want to give holocaust/climate/secondamendment/etc. deniers equal voices, or rather equal imprimatur, the problem is actually the censoring of thoughts so that people feel compelled to toe the received and accepted thought on a given topic.

So, in effect, investigating root causes or nuance is denied because any of that could, in some people's minds, undermine the larger issue(s).

It's sad and unfortunate that discussing things must become personal attacks rather than being viewed as inquiry.
Way back in my computer repair days, I used to commonly see macbooks with horrendously frayed and/or just generally poor condition chargers. While, other laptops didn't seem to have that issue nearly as often (although breaking the DC jack was a common problem for those folks, but that's a different issue).

You shouldn't have to be tender and gentle with the power cable for your device... it should be durable and stand up to abuse. After all, it's for a laptop which may experience hard yanks as people walk away with it plugged in, the cable being stepped on or crushed by a chair, being thrown into a bag not coiled (or sometimes coiled too tightly), dropped from waist-height (or higher), thrown to a friend, etc.

It's not unreasonable to expect these things to be very durable. Functionality and durability should take precedence over design aesthetics here.

(as an aside, the white color always ended up looking filthy in short while, and was nearly impossible to restore to bright white)
Only if done primarily to avoid/evade taxes.
What are the best tools to track personal subscription services?
Technically since all the info is known about it, you could build a replica.... but all those AC generators even today would be bulky and power hungry
>...because we see the servers allow us to, and don't allow us to, respectively.

Did you really have to attempt "ssh root@google.com" and be denied to know you weren't allowed to do that? If you had been allowed in and it was obviously something internal, would you really just assume that Google intended for you to have access?

Literally all of your objections would apply identically to trespassing laws. Do you have to check the lock on every door before you know whether or not you're allowed on the other side?

>You can't run a legal system exclusively on what a reasonable person would do. People have to have some idea of what that means so they can have some idea ahead of time whether the thing they want to do is legal or not.

It's not exclusively based on the reasonable person standard, that's just what it falls back to when the situation isn't completely clear. It allows for judgement based on the facts of the situation, instead of having to specify every possible variable in statute.

More to the point, this case is about a guy who started a new company to compete with his previous employer, and then accessed the computers at the old company. Are you really suggesting that the question of whether he was authorized should depend on whether he was successful?
No. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
Yes! Finally put my Philosophy degree to use!
Distilling one's "like" of a person down to their sexual preference [or skin color/religion/take on abortion/etc.] isn't exactly the best way to promote ideas and discussion, either. I am not sure if someone saying "I don't like gay people" is the best person to defend in the debate of "what is free speech?", which is what it seems like you are trying to sarcastically do here.

Note, this coworker in question didn't say "I don't think gay marriage should be an institution of the state" or some other impersonal statement that can actually be evaluated through logic. There is a distinct difference between those two types of statements. Do you think it's reasonable to defend people who say "I don't like gay people."?
Well some people have to work much harder to avoid incarceration.
"Photons from two different sources have different characteristics, like color and wavelength. If they have different wavelengths, they cannot interfere, Yu said"

Can somebody explain why that is the case?
Made an Exit with Startup and this is what I do now
Why not create a new user named Legacy Anonymous and reassign all anonymous comments to it?
Appendix 2 is my favorite part of that article.

Otherwise... it sounds like we've been doing LAN parties for a long, long time.
What If Companies Shared Exactly How They Determine Salaries?
I will remove it in our next updates.
The group with the most power evidently.
Know the Fate of Your Relationship with Algorithm Through Couples’ Tone of Voice
Yeah, I don't see a need to have more than one server. Even at gigantic companies, you only need single servers per team. It takes very little to restart a server:

sudo service ircd-irc2 restart