skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What fun - I did a monte carlo estimate a few years back when trying to determine what purchases price of house my girlfriend and I could afford. It depended on probable interest rate, how much my old house would sell for, etc. It'd be interesting to see how simply it could be modeled in this.
We know that. Well, a lot of us do.

The real questions are:

How do we educate those who don't understand this yet?

Do enough of us, who do understand, care enough to act in a meaningful way?
My bad. At the time of posting I thought that FairTax was fairly well known.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax#Monthly_tax_rebate
Solar panels on the sort of scale being discussed here would, once you consider the logistics of maintenance, basically be a small (or large) town that also has a huge number of solar panels.

Running a company town devoted to solar panel maintenance in the middle of the Sshara wouldn't be impossible, but it's a lot harder than just plunking down a one-time infrastructure investment.
Wow I hope you never have any amount of power over any computer system that handles data. Even for the brief moment before you are fired, what a disaster.
> but I do not believe you're entitled to founder status just because you're an early hire

That's not what I said at all.

Early employees that are paid a fair market salary are absolutely not entitled to founder status, and in some cases not even substantial equity.
Yes, capture energy there.

But don't make electricity, make hydrocarbons using the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_proces...

Ship water and coal, and return with mixed hydrocarbons, then distribute them all over the world. You thermalize (rather than electrolyze) the water to get hydrogen, then react it with the carbon from the coal.

Build a large pipeline to the nearest port to transport the material rather than trucking it.

The leftover oxygen can be sold, or more likely just released.

Since hydrogen releases much more energy (per atom) than carbon when burned, and since since hydrogen outnumbers the carbon in the final product, this will greatly reduce CO2 emissions, even though it's not completely zero.

Capturing heat from the sun is much easier and cheaper than electricity.
I don't think the paper asked for that. Relevant quote:

> machine learning is more concerned with making predictions, even if the prediction can not be explained
very well (a.k.a. “a black­box prediction”)

So in your example: an algo may explain that a car slows down, before taking a turn, because else it would likely crash. It may even get to a threshold ("under these weather conditions, anything over 55Mph is unsafe when taking a turn of such and such degree"). Statistics can help with that.

Welling is not asking for deep learning models to explain why a person got a cancer, but to explain its reasoning when it diagnoses a person with cancer ("I am confident, because in a random population of a 1000 other patients, these variables are within ..."). Statistics can help with that. It aligns with their mind set and tool set.

Regulations are cheated even with these kind of explanations, but that is for another story (black box models may provide some plausible deniability).
Almost none of my edits ever get reverted, including even fairly major changes, other than in contentious articles or when it comes down to an editorial decision.

Generally I'm either making minor fixes (basically nothing you would dispute), or when I add something, it's cited.

When there is a conflict, it's probably beyond most people to figure out how to handle the conflict resolution process (which generally, in my experience, is fruitful), but if you're adding high quality content, that rarely comes up - it's just that when it does it takes up a disproportionate amount of your time.
What is the big red button?
Is there actually any such thing as a democracy, and if so would we want it?

A pure democracy would actually be a nightmarish form of totalitarianism in which the majority was able to enforce its norms upon any minority without any checks or balance.

The US is a constitutional republic in which democratic institutions act as one check upon power.
>> "I think the only reason to pursue [solar panels in the Sahara] would be if it were a stopgap measure in which the long-term goal would be to reduce consumption of energy and to change our lifestyles to be more sustainable, so that subsequent generations don't have to deal with as many problems as we're going to leave them."

I hear this logic a lot and disagree. Finding more sensible and environmental ways to produce electricity needs to be the goal because we cannot be more sustainable. Mankind thrives on energy. I think the past 263 years (since Franklin's kite experiment) have shown us electricity is a way of progressing. We need power to run things. Where that power comes from is the difficult part. Unless another form of energy is found that can be used to work everyday devices from phones, to computers, to lights, not sure how we get away from electricity and only continuing to increase its consumption.

As for paneling the desert - The massive solar arrays in the Mojave desert outside of Vegas show that the sun can be used effectively, but the cost to produce the materials and impact on desert flora/fauna that go into the arrays are just as bad for the environment. The material cost alone in terms of environmental impact make it a laughable endeavor in terms of "environmental" concern.
'Check the power' is a naive and impossible solution that has been attempted by essentially every human civilization since the dawn of time and has never, ever worked. Sometimes you just need to recognize truth when it smashes you in the face again and again over thousands of years and accept that we need some way to deal with it.

Also are you really advocating only one line of defense against unchecked power? "Just trust that people with power won't abuse it" isn't good enough and it's never going to be, but that's what you're advocating.
Which is the problem with the massive subsetting of the language that ISO Core C++ with all safety profiles turned on performs. It rules out so much existing code that porting will be very expensive.

We won't know what the delta is between "migrating to ISO Core C++ with all safety profiles" and "migrating to another, memory-safe language with a good FFI" until ISO Core C++ is complete and widely deployed. My instinct tells me that this delta will not be particularly wide--that is, that porting most existing industry C++ code to totally safe ISO Core C++ will not be much easier than rewriting that code in Go or Swift or whatever. (Look at how long the Python 2 to Python 3 transition has been, and consider that ISO Core C++ is much farther away from industry C++ than Python 3 was from Python 2.)

I could be wrong about this, though--we'll have to see.
Just to say that this is not my experience. Have made highly contentious edits and created entirely new articles on topics from Hoplomachus through Corpse Paint to planning law in the UK. None of my good edits have been reverted, but some of my poor edits have been manually reverted after review by a human editor.
Definitely isn't a recruiting tool or an ad - in fact I don't even really go into the details of the plan when I do my recruiting because most employees don't really know the difference at that point. If it was an ad it certainly wasn't effective as nobody has contacted me :p.

I'm curious what advantages options give employees over a system like ours. I don't see any, and the whole point of our structure was to give employees lower risk and more comfort that they actually owned equity, not a promise of it.
For a whie there were some wikiprojects (Vandal Patrol; Rollback; twinkle) and some of the people involved were very aggressive in making reverts.

Those problems were recognised and so things are a bit better now, but still.
So the technology is already there, but we can't/won't implement this because of politics? What a shame!
The article raises an important point that I haven't seen addressed elsewhere in the comments: revert bots can be terrible.

For example, I was once reading about a song, and at the bottom there was a link to a youtube video. The link was broken, so I replaced it with a working youtube link.

The edit was immediately reverted by a bot that was anti-all-links-to-youtube. Fine, maybe that is a problem. But it's also a problem that the anti-youtube bot replaced my youtube link with a youtube link.

When I went to the bot's page, it was filled with comments from dozens of others who had made similar edits that were blindly reverted. The bot author, who took a "it's me against the world" stance, proclaiming that his bot was doing the only sensible thing, and that he was "sick of arguing". As the paper proclaims, this immediate negative reinforcement had long term consequences of turning away many good faith editors.
This is an honest question. In what areas of the industry does C++ dominate the language landscape except hardware drives? I used to think this was true for games but I've seen most studios move to C# as the community has matured around it. All other major spaces seem like they've moved on to more managed languages.
SSE is fine except stupid Internet Explorer doesn't support it: http://caniuse.com/#feat=eventsource

A goal of Firehose is to have the fewest number of transports possible so the client doesn't have to spend much time negotiating the transport. I found WebSockets was more widely supported (http://caniuse.com/#feat=websockets) and HTTP long polling could take care of the rest.

Before I built Firehose I looked at socket.io, which had a ton of transports, but found that it was too slow, flakey, and unpredictable for our needs.
I am extremely curious to see how the GOP deals with Trump.

Climate change has opened up a favorite, remote camp site early. I am eager to go early and explore places and see things, like rocks, normally covered in water, or plants early in their cycle, not normally seen. That is kind of technical though...

My youngest moved out. Looking forward to figuring out how to live as a couple again!
Note that this is from 2013.
It looks like all the comments by VeilEm are deleted now, which is unfortunate. No matter how controversial or indelicately phrased, you expressed frustrations with an open source project that no doubt also have and I think you should stand by what you said.
MikroTik donates €1m to children's hospital
Top 10 Mistakes I Made in My Life (as an Entrepreneur)
WhatsApp is down in most countries
Loved the reference to 'Gorgias', which, incidentally, I read in my college days at a liberal arts school.

Rhetoric isn't the path to truth, but it can sure help with power.

Here it is online: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/gorgias.html

Edit: added link to 'Gorgias'.
The problem you face with DPC is in the US you'd have to subscribe to 2-3 different healthcare providers, your GP, a hospital and perhaps another specialist (endocrinologist, cardiologist, etc.) Unless you have a DPC membership with a provider that supplies all of that. My GP has DPC, but I still have insurance from my employer that would cover any hospital visits.
ARM designs the Core

STM, NXP, Mediatek, etc buy the core design, slap it on a piece of silicon, design peripherals around it (SATA ports, UARTS, SDIO controllers, etc), slap those on the silicon, put interconnects in between, and sell the complete SoC.

This is of course EXTREMELY oversimplified. But the idea is the same: ARM makes the CORE, and others make SoCs out of it. (I am not aware of anyplace you can buy a simple ARM CORE without it being part of an SOC.
It's easy to dismiss this as "oh well, it's not perfect". The problem arises when you see something that is factually incorrect but cannot change it, and you know others rely on it. I've noticed a number of wrong, or just not precisely correct, things on Wikipedia, so I seldom click on those links when they appear in a search result.

I've never used it all that much, to be honest, but the information hiding aspect is what makes it so dangerous. Allow incorrect information to appear on the site and then explain why it's incorrect. Allow information on the site that might be incorrect, so that others can investigate further. But presenting the material as if it is correct, because there is a quality control mechanism in place, is simply dishonest.

If Wikipedia disappeared tomorrow, it would not bother me at all. No information would be lost. It would reappear elsewhere on the internet.
Unicorns to cockroaches: tech in 2016
Performance anomaly on the Intel Broadwell processor
Why put all your eggs in one basket anyway?
If you've got a successful (i.e. working well) and fully utilized leading edge fab, it can be more profitable than printing bank notes.

However it's so insanely expensive to set up that type of chip manufacture the only way it is really viable now is to share the costs. Samsung, TSMC and Intel (and maybe GF) are the only groups left who can afford it (see http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1327060 ) and you have to keep up the r+d every year to stay competitive...
This kind of sounds like Northwest Angle [1], which, as an American, I think looks pretty ridiculous on our maps and we should probably just give it to Canada in exchange for some oil or something.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Angle
I think they are trying to be too smart about it ... I rather waste several GB's of HDD space then having my production crash once because of dependencies.
There are good reasons to choose an unamanged language, but this part strikes me as odd.

"my last project was Java. C++ would have allowed us to port more easily to other platforms"

I'm not saying that you must wrong for your particular situation, but as soon as you've compile Java, you've essentially ported it to a massive number of platforms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines

If anything a dependency on OpenGL would limit your choices.
What you can't say: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

"Do you have any opinions that you would be reluctant to express in front of a group of your peers?

If the answer is no, you might want to stop and think about that. If everything you believe is something you're supposed to believe, could that possibly be a coincidence? Odds are it isn't. Odds are you just think whatever you're told."
You can live on a partial pressure of about 0.15 atm of oxygen. Less than that and your blood will lose oxygen as it passes through your lungs. So the tank works if the pressure is high enough.
The Media always seem to frame questions like this wrong. The question to ask is, "Why shouldn't we solar panel the Sahara Desert?" And once that question is answered we get started.
They have a very close relationship with their preferred foundries and design chips with a specific foundry and process in mind. The big benefit of going fabless is that you don't have to worry so much about keeping your fab busy enough to cover its expenses. Intel's basically the only company that always sells enough of its own chips to keep its fabs busy and profitable.
I think you're actually just suffering from the same problem you are complaining about, but your nostalgia is for the early digital era, instead of for the analog era. Everything published on CD for the last 20 years has been mastered by raging asshats. All of it sounds like shit, no matter how perfectly reproduced the shit-sound is when you play it back. Digital downloads and streaming services are even worse. Nearly all of them have audible watermarks applied.

I think people buy vinyl because there is some hope that the vinyl issues, even the new ones, were mixed and mastered by someone who cared about the result. It is more likely that you're going to hear something nice on vinyl.
As mentioned in the other recent thread about Wikikpedia, I am a Wikipedian. I joined active editing in 2010, that is after the heyday of welcoming new editors, but long before most articles on important topics were anywhere near to being well sourced. I have tried to clean up the mess on some articles, and am a winner or co-winner of two Million Awards[1] for fixing up high-page-view articles.

But how I got the awards basically illustrates the problem. One article I fixed I wrote entirely off-line in a text editor file, while commenting on the talk page of the previous lousy version of the article, and then I dropped in the new article text all at once. Every previous time when I tried piecemeal editing of that article, my best edits would be reverted, while other stuff that was entirely made up and without reliable sources would be inserted into the article. The second article I worked on fixing up was a collaborative effort. Again, I started with discussion on the article talk page. My first few edits were reverted, contrary to reliable sources, by editors who exerted "ownership" on the article but who refused to look up sources. Later I was joined by two other editors, and one of the other two made it his project to rewrite the article from top to bottom for one of the Wikipedia editing contests. He liberally threw out old unsourced crap and then layered in new, well sourced text. I mentioned on the article talk page I'd like to fix a few sections of the article, and proofread all of it, and after he deleted the old crap, I put in new good content in the sections I worked on and checked all of his references throughout the article. The former editors who let the article be bad for years slithered away. It's a slog and a struggle like this every time someone tries to improve Wikipedia--the established editing culture includes snap judgments without looking up reliable sources.

AFTER EDIT: I also mentioned in the previous thread about Wikipedia that I hope sometime soon a philanthropist funds a Free Online Encyclopedia X Prize to put to the test what could be possible in building an accurate, well edited free, online encyclopedia if some new projects began and tried out some new models of project management and perhaps some new software. (I personally don't have any trouble dealing with Wikipedia's software, but I have been using various kinds of markup languages since the 1980s in earlier editing work.) The only way to know what's possible is to try to challenge the incumbent project with some competition, I think. Even if Wikipedia then just ended up winning a prize with reasonable criteria, it would still become better, and we would all have a better idea about what works and what doesn't.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Million_Award
Y'know, some people read that and think, 'gosh, old folks always complain about kids; kids must not really be getting any worse!' I wonder if kids really have been getting worse for millennia…
I'll toss my own experience out there.

I've contributed edits to maybe a dozen or so different Wikipedia articles, and would like to contribute more, but it's hard to get past a couple of hurdles.

The main one is the byzantine and archaic editing tools. The markdown language that Wikipedia uses is a PITA to learn, and following a discussion on the talk page is almost impossible. Wikipedia presents a wonderful UX for browsing and reading. It has perhaps the worst UX I've ever seen for a beginner who wants to make a contribution.

Beyond that, I spent a significant amount of time editing some articles on a fringe religious group that I had studied extensively. (Apart from the group's own leaders, I arguably knew more about the group than anyone else in the world.) But the group that was the focus of the article kept backing out my edits and replacing them with propaganda. It was simply too much work to fight them (especially with the horrible edit/discussion tools), they were a lot more motivated than I was, and I eventually gave up.
I think there's a valuable role for such an institution in the world, but I'm not sure why it should be the university.

The vast majority of people who attend university don't really care about optimizing for that goal. The vast majority of people who require university attendance as a prerequisite for something else don't really, either. And the vast majority of people who provide outside funding to universities don't: they fund research, not teaching. And as a result, the vast majority of successful employees in this system are those who at best want the university to be a place where faculty and graduate students learn things, and only secondarily where undergraduates learn things.

The change to make universities, as a system, be about people who specifically care about being a better thinker would be greatly disruptive to society, and for what benefit? Those who are interested in becoming better thinkers can go to a different sort of institution.

Arguably there is such an institution already, namely graduate school. That you have to go through undergrad first is not particularly more onerous than that you have to go through grade school first. Grade school sucks a lot for people who care about learning.
This can't possibly be cost effective or profitable?
Retail transactions are through the roof by almost all indicators
Top 11 websites of 2015 for in-depth and insightful articles (HN is included)
> didn't allow any patches for supporting systems with over 8GB of memory

The Bitcoin Core developers are incapable of coercing other users into not applying non-Bitcoin-compatible 8 GB block size limit rules. Also they don't want to apply that patch themselves, anyway, since they believe it is incompatible with what they understand to their best knowledge to be the goals and properties of Bitcoin. (Thankfully their goals also include lots of adoption, and they seem to have some proposals for how to achieve this even in the absence of 8 GB block sizes.)

Linux is not a decentralized distributed consensus rule system, so unfortunately I don't think the comparison is useful.
For the record, this paper was published in 2013, in case anyone's looking at it and wondering why its conclusions seem awfully obvious today.

http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/5/664
Right. A CTO could negotiate these terms. Everyone else should value their options properly at 0
3 Things to Do Before Weight Loss Surgery
That's different enough from VestedContributor that you should give it a name and write it up.

http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/VestedContributor

VestedContributors think the rules can be bent for them because they've been around so long and done so much good work.
Lets say the fmv in 2015 is $500, and your strike price $100. If they are ISO, in 2015 you own no regular tax on it(thats the Incentivized). In 2017 you owe capital gains on $900.

However, AMT(alternative minimum tax) doesnt recognize ISO. So in 2015, you have to calculate AMT, which $400 counts towards. This is basically a no-deduction(except a high standard deduction) flat tax, you potentially owe 26-35% on that 400. Even though you didnt sell anything - this is where people get screwed.

So lets say you paid $100 in AMT. In 2017, you still owe capital gains tax on the whole $900, but you calculate AMT and claim the difference, up to $100, as a credit - the difference should be >100. You can actually claim this credit every year until previously paid AMT runs out, but most likely the difference wont be sizable enough until you sell.
Drivers will go to where the users are, and I don't think decentralized blockchains are an implementation detail most users care about.

The lack of insurance/license guarantees hasn't prevented users from flocking to Uber.
Palantir may have this in their analysis toolbox. Will they offer an on-demand SaaS/cloud version? Imagine the feedback loops when applied to HN or other social poster history! Or in real-time analysis of draft comments.
AAA games, embedded, operating systems (err, Windows shell at least), web servers, core libraries, etc.

Still big in medical devices too, embedded or not.
I think this is super cool! We're so bad at estimating probabilities (think Han Solo's "never tell me the odds") that this helps visualize the distribution of outcomes