skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure I understand your position. They entail risk, but they aren't motivated by risk, they don't exist because of risk.

> Startups are not really about money

I agree,

> Only do it if... you believe you're changing the world in the greatest way you can

They are about pursuing a vision. Even YC has said they dislike opportunists, and for good reasons (they make bad startups).
No, RLS does not necessarily require separate database users. Using database users is one relatively obvious way to use the feature, but you can very well do something like 'SELECT myapp_set_current_user(...)' or something, and use a variable securely set therein for the row restrictions.
Well-put. A parallel here is the pre-approvals for credit cards that people receive in the mail. It's not uncommon for a person to get those who is regularly turned down by offers or even in collections. There's just some algorithm or set of criteria by a certain company that says "send the offer" while others with different information or criteria would refuse it. Simple as that most of the time.
If the odds are 1 in 292.2 million, doesn't this mean that the expected value is actually positive? If you had 292.2 million bucks, you could guarantee a win.
Yes, that is how you time.
Unless, of course, they've just typed in their 16-digit account number before being connected with you ;-)

(Doesn't sound like your case, but people will miss that little qualifier. I mean, of course, the cases where they ask for your account number - not verify details)
Unfortunately, it's too late by that point. Paypal have taken on the risk, if they just let you get your money and leave, then that's what all the fraudsters would do.
There is a canyon of difference between what is "supposed to" happen, and what does. And before you bring up suing or reporting or anything like that, know that those activities usually require time and money that the employee probably does not have, and will likely cause them to not continue at their job, and through rumors spread through the industry, might cause them to not be able to find another one.
I just subscribed to the Indian version of the service (NF) and oh lord the catalog is hot pile of yesteryear's st(r)eaming garbage
I agree with this comment and your responses in the following discussion to it. Microsoft has made such huge strides, and it's costing them a lot of that because of their hardline attitude on this. And it actually stands contrary to their own advertising, where Microsoft highlights themselves as a more privacy-respecting alternative to using Google products which track you.

The cost/benefit decision here for Microsoft just makes no sense.
Predictive Policing Comes to Restaurants in Chicago
Fayetteville and Little Rock are the two innovation centers (hard not to quote those 2 words). Acxiom, Walmart.
Still makes the customer a shitty person.
It's blinding. I get that it's supposed to imply the pocket connection, but if you go to pocket's website they only use that pink/red color in their logo and for accents like on buttons.
How to be more memorable
They are remunerated more for the risk taken when they offer you a loan that they would if they unfroze your assets.

If you accept the premise of your business being risky, then Paypal's approach seems fair as well.
Great Mortgage Tips and Strategies for Buyers in 2016
Exactly. To give another example, I was at Lucent in the late 90's, just before the telcom collapse. Ultimately, Lucent stock collapsed by 90% and the company was bought by Alcatel (which was just bought by the remaining parts of Nokia that Microsoft didn't grind into dust, but I digress). A big part of what brought Lucent down was not just that sales of communications equipment plummeted, but also that Lucent had extended financing to its customers so they could buy more equipment, and then those same customers defaulted on their loans.

Ultimately, it's important to make sure that a loan-granting organization is run separately from your core business, to avoid people making poor-quality loans just to goose sales numbers.

Still, we've been with Stripe since then and have had no problems.

yet ...

There was a recent article on how hoverboard sellers have suffered massive fraud losses, that specifically talked about how Stripe is trying to chase people to recover hundreds of thousands of dollars in chargebacks. That can't happen too many times, given the thin margins of payment processing, before they have to do something to protect themselves.
You could guarantee a win with 175 million or so.

You couldn't however guarantee that you'd win more than you spent -- because others could win as well, diluting the pot.
Remembering my high school economics, from too many years ago, we used the term backward bending supply curve of labour - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_bending_supply_curve_...
Likely kinda how Mac OS X has been X or version "10" forever, but has actually had a decades' worth of version updates. At the end of the day it's just a branding change and a change in expectation management.
Nuclear weapons risk greater than in cold war, says ex-Pentagon chief
> I think that HN is one of the rare forums where this article doesn't apply.

It does apply. Maybe less so years ago, but it still applies. I've seen it often enough, and recognized the problems as ones I routinely see here.
I love the DJ Khaled is the Oprah (https://twitter.com/oprah/status/1542224596) of Snapchat
I'm proposing a very general rule, certainly, but I think you would still agree there are better and worse ways of spending your time.
I don't know. For a while, I'd forget to pay my electric bill every other month or so, and SDG&E never did anything but send a polite reminder with my next bill.
>"diminishing marginal returns"

I came to a different conclusion. The wealth of time (total man-hours or aggregated lifespans) is more evenly distributed across a population than is the wealth of money. Therefore, to the extent that happiness is influenced by comparing how well-off you are vs others, a person picked at random will be pretty damn close to the same standing as whoever is the Time-Richest Person in the World. But they are FAR less likely to be anywhere near the Money-Richest Person in the World.
> ...yet you don't want Uber to do proper background checks. Okay.

Heh. When did I say that? I bet you can't provide a quote... because I neither said it, nor implied it. :)

From the sound of it, it's you who's interested in forgoing proper background checks, and just blackballing everyone who's been convicted of a felony:

> In other words, "Hey, Uber hires known felons and its okay because I can think of a scenario where background checks fail."

Think through your statement:

* You -obviously- strongly disagree with Grishnakh's assertion that background checks are frequently going to be insufficient to root out everyone who would harm another human while driving them around... especially when they've recently arrived in the country.

* You express that disagreement by rephrasing his statement as (and I'm paraphrasing here) "Because background checks fail, it's okay to hire convicted felons who've served their time and are now out of jail.".

* This implies that you feel that blanket prohibitions on employing people who've been previously convicted of a felony are acceptable.

If one wants to perform a more-thorough-than-usual background check on folks convicted of a felony, charge them more to perform the check. [0] Do that, rather than instituting a policy that ends up being -at best- dramatically classist, -at worst- dramatically racist, and -at all times- dramatically damaging to the folks who've reformed themselves and are now decent, honest, useful people.

> You are saying "Well, yes the burden is shifted to drivers and that is okay."

Sure, but that wasn't the core of your argument. Your argument's core was that Uber et. al. were being dishonest and/or intentionally deceptive about the limits of their coverage.

> You clearly don't understand what I've written at all...

No, I do. I can read both the text and the subtext of what you've written. :)

[0] But, frankly, the same level of scrutiny should be applied to everyone... you never know who's an antisocial scumbag that just hasn't been caught yet.
Very valid point.

I was trying to provide the opposite point of view. The whole, there are two sides to every story and somewhere in the middle is the truth, bit.

OP/Guest has every right to be annoyed at the service, its their prerogative.
That is either sad or masterful, I'm not sure which yet.
No, that's not really it, although you could see it as a very degenerate form of a btree. Basically it's using clustering inherent to the data - say a mostly increasing timestamp, autoincrement id, model number ... - to build a coarse map of the contents. E.g. saying "pages from 0 to 16 have the date range 2011-11 to 2011-12" and "pages from 16 to 48 have the date range 2012-01-01 to 2012-01-13". With such range maps (where obviously several overlapping ranges can exist) you can build a small index over large amounts of data.

Obviously single row accesses in a fully cached workload are going to be faster if done via a btree rather than such range maps, even if there's perfect clustering. But the price for having such an index is much lower, allowing you to have many more indexes. Additionally it can even be more efficient to access via BRIN if you access more than one row, due to fewer pages needing to be touched.
This sounds like every social media ever
No, of Course People Aren’t Registering Their Drones with the FAA
yea Mark, you are right. I did learn an expensive lesson.

One of my main frustrations though was that this was a very highly regarded YC company. Should consumers expect this disrespectful behavior to be accepted from other YC companies as well?

Should YC founders be expected to be able to simply pick and choose which customers they want to arbitrarily delete?

I can completely understand if this was a fly by night operation. But YC is basically the Harvard of startups and this was completely out of left field for me.
To be sure, all of science could reorient itself around your mystical drug experiences, but that could take a really long time. Wouldn't it be easier for you to ask those beings the two prime factors of a really big number? That would settle the question quickly enough.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/21/universal-love-said-the...
This is not really true. It's just an artifact of the way happiness research is done. There's no cap on income, but typically happiness is rated from 1-10. Thus you see a "leveling off". If you use a log scale you actually see a continuous increase.
> The market cap valuation works in exactly the same way.

No it doesn't, not in a functioning public market.

Just because the guy claims the cats are $500,000 each, doesn't actually make it so. The sole thing occurring there, is a person is claiming something (that is obviously false). No taxing authority on the planet would assess those cats at $500,000; no professional auditing firm would either. The entire bogus premise collapses instantly upon scrutiny.

In almost any market, a claim is worthless unless you can eventually cash it in for a large portion of that sum, typically in a currency that possesses real value. In your example, your cats can never be cashed in for a meaningful fraction of their proclaimed value under any scenario. I can sell my Tesla stock however, there is an extremely well established and accepted value placed on it. I can still pretend, and make an outrageous claim on what my Tesla stock is worth ($1 trillion!), however it is nothing more than a bogus claim and has no actual bearing on reality.
Generate PDF from a Python-Controlled Unix Pipeline
> In the article they talk about how doggedly old-fashioned the market's purveyors are, eschewing computers in favor of paper and pencil.

There is a lot of professionals that are strongly anti-bullshit/shiny toys and live and breathe no-nonsense.
These purveyors will all have decent cell phones, deal with mail and electronic communication where it makes sense, and use the most tried and true, bullet proof tools where money is on the line.

For now, if you are auctionning standing in a room with prices that fly by at every moment, computers are not the relevant tool. Same if you're taking orders while talking to someone with hands soaked in icy water.

Pencil and paper are still the fastest and most reliable media depending on what you are doing.

PS: interestingly NEETs sometime seem to be another kind of way to refuse bullshit. Some of the younger generations feel that working or participating to the society has no sense, they're predestined to be cannon fodder. And they're not completely wrong in some cases, even if they fail to see potential alternative paths. When there seem to be no way forward, some will just stop, instead of blindly following the path as their parents did.
carries a risk of at most -4 points.

I do not know if this is true. I have read that, although it only shows up to -4, it can cost you more than that. I have no idea if that information is still true or not. A lot of the algorithms have changed.
I think studies have shown that past a relatively low (by SV standards) level of income ($75kish I think) the relationship between money and happiness breaks down.

The argument can definitely be made that the happiness difference between "comfortable and independent" and "Zuckerberg" is not all that great.
He would have googled "EFF" on his phone but it would have taken to long on T-Mobile
Be that as it may, it is hardly reasonable that the customer bear the onus of any illegal conduct by the restaurant.
The submission talks about terabytes of data. Copying/transforming is not viable in such situations.
Since I'm most likely will have no impact on any plans I'm only hoping for some optimistic predictions (a plausible bright future) and what mechanics would be involved. So no, I'm not expecting an air tight plan, just a hint at how it might look.

My general take is that, AI or not, the world is continuing to progress towards a future where extinction level capabilities are not only within reach, but also within reach for more and more people. It is, to me, not a question of if, but when, such capabilities will be in the hands of an individual, or organization, that either by malice, or incompetence, would be a serious problem.

Last year a pilot intentionally crashed a plane in act of sucicde, taking 150 passengers with him. Consider a likeminded person capable of engineering a virus.

So, my optimistic take on the future is that while such capabilities are developed, one would hope, that in parallel capabilities to mitigate those threats are also developed, so that when the problems arise the combined capabilities of all benign actors is sufficient to evade extinction.

In the case of AI it just seems implausible that any debate could manage to stop the technological race. Just look at the climate change debate, it has been going on for decades and is just gaining political traction. AI isn't even on the radar yet...

So the plausible futures too me are either that AI will wipe us out, or not. In the event that it does not I think one plausible future is that the potentially malign AI will operate in an environment where other AI, or near AI-systems, will also perceive it as a threat. Hopefully aggregating into the capacity to suppress the dangers in a benign way.

Also, I believe any path from here to AI will consist of a complex system of AI-like technology interwoven with human systems resulting in some aggregates with considerable capablites itself not to be discounted.

In some sense I believe we can extrapolate how things will play out just by looking at some systems that might resemble AI today. Consider corporations, these are actors created from a complex system of legal, economic, social and other constructs. While ostensibly owned by, and operated by, humans, the reality is that there is little any individual human can influence them in view of all other forces directing their actions, making them, in a sense, allready existing, AI:s.

Creating actual AI, as a useful thing, will probably involve similar complexity and influences. So in some sense there are probably similar patterns that will play out. Just as corporations can act to influence the world in ways malign to humans, the AI systems would. And just as corporations, the AI would find it self acting in an environment doing its best to contain the malice.
Your wife might be interested in the What Works Clearinghouse (if she doesn't already know of it). They try to sort through the bullshit.

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
>Some students need a clear, verbatim explanation of something. Others need to dance around the concept first, getting a feel for it, before they able to even parse such an explanation.

Different experiences. Memories thrive when connected with other memories and most everyone will have different memories. So it stands to reason different ways of providing the same information will have different results based on each individual's lived experiences.

If I can relate an unknown X to a known Y - or even an unknown X to an unknown Y - I always learn better than if I learned about an unknown X that I'm not able to relate with.

Mnemonics play a large role in things - unfortunately I can't find any studies offhand to that prove mnemonics actually help.
Imagine how much simpler every single query becomes, when you don't have to do complex access checking as part of the criteria. You can just write a normal select/join! The database handles access checking for you.

Suddently, it's not that scary to ask the intern to generate a rather complex report - he can't show anyone data they're not allowed to see by accident.
Bosch makes transmissions. They're getting worried.

Formula-E cars are required to use a specific McLauren motor.[1] The need for a gearbox may reflect its limitations. Formula-E rules also limit input current, so using huge amounts of electrical power for a few seconds of acceleration isn't permitted. In other words, they don't allow Tesla's "launch mode".

Early Tesla models had a two-speed gearbox. That was a disaster. The shock of changing gears over such a wide range wore out the gearboxes rapidly.

Electric locomotives have been transmissionless since the first GE locos. "You cannot strip the gears of a magnetic field", one of the early GE designers wrote. Some things just work better electrically. For a sense of this, here's part of the restoration of the biggest steam locomotive ever built, the Big Boy.[1] It sat at the Ponoma fairgrounds for half a century, and was then towed out and sent to the Union Pacific shops for a full restoration. It's being towed out by a standard sized modern AC Diesel-electric locomotive, which has more drawbar pull than the Big Boy. What's impressive is the precise control. The initial move is about one foot per minute, because they're pulling the old steam giant through a tight curve of temporary track. The Diesel-electric doing the pull has synchronous AC motors and solid state controls, and can apply huge torques smoothly at low speeds with no wheel slip. All the wheels are locked together by active control. You don't need a transmission to get low-end torque from an electric.

[1] http://www.mclaren.com/appliedtechnologies/products/item/e-m...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ji2aGJJAx8
Your Strategy Is Showing #1: The Millennial Road Trip
I don't believe that Snapchat offers content creation. Given that nothing actually persists, is it really content? I feel that it's content as much as small talk with a coworker is content, it's more filler than anything actually substantial.

Now if I was to have a discussion about some technical issue or whatever, that would be creating content, but Snapchat is hardly the ideal, or indeed a feasible platform for that.
what do you mean by high-signal and low-content? i don't know about signal and content, but typically the word coercion is used to refer to forcing people to do something using violence and the threat of violence.
Being welcoming is nice. Being technically excellent is also nice.

The one is not an adequate substitute for the other.
Coming next week...

75% of our users watch pornography at least twice a week. On average it takes 4.73 minutes for males between 28 and 33 years of age, with a household income of between $65-75k pa, who work in the advertising industry and who are married with 2 or more children and personal debt over $25k and at least one car, and a search phase of "mature big tits" to finish watching it.
DriverEasy Professional 4.9.13.1650 Crack and Serial Key Download
> PostgreSQL project, in my mind, sets the standard globally for software documentation.

Sure if you already understand PostgreSQL. If you don't then it isn't particularly user friendly. It's awkward to navigate, doesn't explain the basics (how to actually install it) and tends to combine information that is more for advanced users on the same page as beginners.

Compare you're standard with mine (MongoDB):

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/

https://docs.mongodb.org/manual/
> My problem is not that PostgreSQL does not understand the distribution of my data. It does. The problem is that it comes up with a query plan without realizing that I'm only querying for a very small range of timestamps.

Which version did you reproduce that on? While the problem has not been generally addressed, the specifically bad case of looking up values at the "growing" end of a monotonically increasing data range has been improved a bit over the years (9.0 and then some incremental improvement in 9.0.4).
But in medicine starting treatment doesn't have to correspond with a calendar event. A 'dose' of education is much larger. It would be very difficult to switch curriculum mid semester, because one is getting better results at the midterm.

Talking to teachers, one of the biggest complaints with the last decade of education reforms, is that they have to redo their curriculum every year. Not only what they are teaching changes, but how they are evaluated. Everyone knows that education is broken, and "has a plan to fix it". But their plan is just a new set of arbitrary requirements. They rarely let a system evolve naturally, and instead opt for a yearly rewrite. Its a huge bureaucratic burden that's constantly changing.

The IT equivalent would be you need a minimum of 6 hours of training each time a library you use releases an update. The update may require you to use a new language. Using the most up to date version is required by law.
the nation's youth, who seem to be growing increasingly detached from responsibility and ambition

I can see why - they're not stupid. They see a future of absurd amounts of unpaid overtime, pitiful salaries, long commutes, additional hardship if they choose to have children and an inflexible culture controlled by grey old men.

From the Wiki you linked to: young people falling into this category were framed as lazy, work-shy and voluntarily out of employment. This media portrayal was effective in arousing the concern of Japan's (conservative) middle aged population, but it led only to moderate support for new youth policies.

To paraphrase Max Planck, progress happens one funeral at a time.