skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>>It's hard for him to watch other doctors game the system to increase their earnings

Make no mistakes this isn't just restricted to the US. This is quite common in India too.

>>not only seeing more patients with unaccountably short sessions, but also up-coding their maladies and ordering unnecessary tests.

In India there practices are almost in the fraud territory. Start from doctors having small testing labs in their clinics. Where they order unnecessary test for patients they don't need. Almost every clinic has a neighboring pharmacy, that sells medicines of brands only the doctor next to it prescribes. You won't be able to buy that medicine anywhere else, plus the doctor makes commission in the medicine sold in the pharmacy. Prolonging treatments to maximize per consultation fees is extremely common.

Its very common for hospitals to indulge in advising patients with either incorrect treatments or prolonging treatments. Pointless tests, doctors cooking up stories to scare patients to spend more at hospitals is all common.

>>It's just sad, and many older doctors don't even recommend the profession to young people at this point.

I talked to many doctors(friends, relatives and acquaintances) actually many feel cheated opting to chose a career in medicine. They are told they are very smart people, and all. Told they are super smart hence they deserve to go to medical college. Hence they expect to be paid proportionally. Most watch their friends in engineering, who they think have it(apparently, that's how they perceive it) a lot easier. While they spend a lot of studying, piling up a good deal of student debt, plus on a average making the same money at the end anyway. Except that every thing in life happens decades later.

They look at engineers, especially programmers as people who have a lot of opportunity to switch streams, learn and move on to new stuff, work at big companies, start companies. Especially programmers who are good investors come across as people who made far more sensible career decisions.

Doctos at the end of the day are humans, and are driven by peer financial pressures.
Yeah, they definitely changed the title to be less accurate. This new title is not only objectively worse, but pretty fucking cringeworthy in supplying an excuse to the company for no apparent reason. (And not even a true excuse!) Amazon can't stick up for themselves? The funny thing is that it's not like the original title is "sensationalist". Criticism is not the same thing as sensationalism.
Interesting... this got re-titled, but I'm not sure why. The original title was taken from the title of the linked post: "No, I Don't Want To Configure Your App!".

(ed: I'm more intrigued than anything. It's a good re-titling IMO--I'm not sure who did it or why, but it's something I might've chosen if I didn't think choosing anything other than the post title was frowned upon. hope this doesn't distract from the actual post).
Practically speaking, you can't personally poke the guy with a stick, and you don't trust the people who claim they have poked him. That's the unresolvable problem in the debate, same as with Muslim, guns, climate, autism, etc.
In another universe, a "cybercrme gang" lost it's /16 today due to a xyz regulatory body's decision deeming it as such.

"In addition, spamming from these stolen IP addresses is a felony under the US CAN-SPAM Act."
said another way....
"In addition, sending information in a unauthorized fashion is a felony under the US CAN-SPAM Act."

Should we really be cheerleading more rules and tighter restrictions on comms? Uh. Lets require biometrics to xmit!
The problem with 360 videos is the resolution. Doing some back of the envelope, very approximate estimation, 4k video (like the new Nikon 360 camera) gets you only 426 x 240 resolution when you're looking at any region of the video.

To get something nicer, you'd need to get to 8k, which is 888 x 480 per viewable region. Currently no consumer video cameras that are anywhere near that resolution.
I meant age, but time turned on is a better measure than miles, so in a way both.

Miles is definitely not a very valuable measure, at least not in my experience. An old (age) car, with few miles, means lots of city miles - those are the hardest for the car.

On the other hand lots of miles, and young age means highway, which is basically nothing for a car. But there are lots of miles.

It's basically a wash, so miles is not a good way to evaluate a car.
Honesty is definitely not on the list of ddbate club priorities.
I enjoyed the article, thanks for the link. It appears to me that the author writes the book placing value of life fulfilment over traditional career success (where extreme focus pays greater dividends). I'm definitely a scanner and have considered it a negative but the author seems to have a positive and potentially useful view on it, I'll probably take a look at the book.
>rants about ux
>not a responsive webpage
Клиника современного протезирования ДентЭрум
Baggage Handling System – Schiphol Airport [video]
That's what User agent started out as. Browser name and version. Now imagine you're building a new browser.
Having lived in very conservative and very liberal areas of the US, the rhetoric is hilariously similar from both sides.

People in liberal areas talk about the south as if it were some backwards place, yet most have never even visited.

People in conservative areas think California is full of hippies, yet again, have never been there.

Guess what? People just disagree on politics! Always will. It doesn't mean one side is right and one is wrong.
I think the whole situation with user-agent strings being ridiculous was really put into perspective when I read that the latest version of IE (Edge) has a UA like this:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/42.0.2311.135 Safari/537.36 Edge/12.10136
Unreliable agents do not make something false. If you are lucky enough to have great grandparents go and ask them about the time before the polio vaccine. I asked mine and it was a nightmare.
Maybe we need some rating agency rating agencies. And some more that will rate those too. If we can go up enough meta-levels, maybe it'll all become so confusing that it'll be impossible to effectively game.

(I get weird ideas when I'm tired.)
I wasn't aware that the article was written by Verizon.

In all seriousness, it's not V who decides who is good or bad on the Internet - it's a shared consensus that things like this are Bad(tm).
Do you have info materials about OpenAI I could use in AI events?

Will you work with 3rd parties to rise awareness and support, recruit talent and external collaborators (e.g. research groups)?
This is one of those squishy things that's hard to assess. For me, I would stop short of a title that would be unacceptable if you substituted a (private) person's name for the company/country/whatever mentioned. If it was "Susan has absolutely no idea how to ..." I would call it "over the top" myself, but I'm no moderator. The guidelines also discourage "gratuitous adjective[s]" in titles, of which "absolutely" applies.

> Do authors have no say in what they call their piece?

Absolutely. No one is asking smashcompany.com to change their title. But this isn't smashcompany.com either.
I use this often on OS X :)
The first sentence of the article is, "Amazon is relatively new to the job of running an app store, and some of their mistakes are either hilarious or infuriating, depending on how much money you’ve lost trying to deal with them."

The decision to switch the submission title away from the article's actual title is unjustified. The decision to switch it to a selective edit of the article's first sentence is even worse.
That makes sense; the most recent editions of POSIX "import" ISO C '99. I had a copy of POSIX handy to check it, but not ISO C :)
I disagree. I think it has a great deal to do with part of western society -- particularly, the rhetorical strategies that social movements of the left have deliberately adopted.

Sure enough, just about anyone can get caught in the idea "Well, if my opponent thought about it, then surely they'd agree with me. They don't agree with me, so therefore they're not thinking people, and I need to use something other than reason to make them change their mind." But the difference is that the left are currently much more willing then to apply theories of social norms instead of arguments.

Terms such as "climate denier", "evolution denier", "free-thinker" (you wouldn't want to disagree with our opinion on religion, and show you're not a free thinker, now would you?), etc, were coined deliberately for rhetorical effect. Similarly, social movements on the left are usually quicker to play the game of rhetorical escalation. Can I find some rhetoric by which to portray my opponent's opinion as "sexist" or "ignorant"? So that regardless of what their reasoning is, the pressure to avoid being socially viewed as ignorant is an incentive for them to change their mind.
Jackpot-rigging scandal is forgotten as Powerball fever sweeps the United States
I've always liked Beta's approach to assignment, calls, and returns (whilst disliking most of the rest of its syntax, sigh).

Assignments work left to right, approximately like this:

(x, y) => (y, x)

which swaps x and y.

Calls that return multiple values look like

x => sincos => (sinx, siny)

and we can string together all sorts of things like this

x => sincos => sum => y

Procedures looked something like

sincos(double x) {
...
} returns (sinval, cosval)

All this syntax is pretty approximate, but perhaps you'll get the idea. To me, it seemed attractive in that a tuple of values flowed in at the top of a procedure, then left to right on each line, and top to bottom between lines, and finally a tuple of values is returned. Seemed like a natural sugaring of CPS style.
Well, let me jump in here too. Just relearn HTML, JavaScript, and CSS = HTML5. I therefore recommend two books:

JavaScript for Web Developers and CSS3 The Missing Manual. Don't overthink this. From this you can move on to frameworks if you feel you need them.

Now, concerning the backend ... well, lots of choices. C# with ASP MVC, Ruby, JavaScript with NodeJS, PHP is still very relevant. Pick what you like, seriously.
I agree - and if one is a migrant, it would be wise to watch the community's attitude to foreigners. Maybe in a decade or two, it would be a time to bid farewell the country one now calls home. I can feel the tension rising.
This article and similar debates seem to be taking place under the assumption that investors actually trust the credit rating agency ratings, a notion which I see very little evidence of. Even before the financial crisis, most investors were creating funds and investment strategies without regard to the ratings given by the government-backed ratings agencies (GBRA); the GBRAs have basically only been a rubber stamp required to determine reserve requirements and other regulatory issues. For example, if investment banks had really cared about GBRA ratings, they would get ratings before packaging together loans, not after.

If I am right, then GBRAs are not to blame for the financial crisis, except for the fact that they may have given the public and the regulators false confidence in the credit-worthiness of borrowers. This view really says that the GBRA are worthless overhead, which only serve to help the government pretend that regulators know what is going on and are protecting the citizens.
Candy Crush Soda Saga Hack 2016 No Survey Android-IOS
What is PaaS?
Exactly this. Everyone says oh, it is so much easier to calculate with circles around the sun--this only true if you want wrong answers to the position of the planets. So wrong that you can see it with the naked eye. Nobody believed Copernicus because his model was not predictive--this gets left out when we want to tell stories about Medieval anti-scientific bias.

When Kepler came along and introduces an elliptical heliocentric model with the equal areas law, scientifically minded people switch to the heliocentric view. However, the math for this is really hard. We use elliptical curves in cryto today. You can calculate the position of a planet with Ptolemy's model on an abacus with nothing more complex than division.
IMO, "these people don't know what they're doing" isn't linkbait, it's a very specific criticism that the people in charge of the app store are either naive or incompetent. You could complain that's a pretty harsh take, but the truth of the statement has nothing to do with the harshness of it, it lies in the evidence they provide. You can even test it! Do they make good decisions or poor decisions?

I think there's a lot more "editorializing" going on by inserting an implicit excuse into the title, that wasn't asked for and wasn't needed.
That's odd because it's the opposite of the stated policy. I came to say that the original title and article, in my opinion, had a much different meaning and intent.

Original Title: No, I Don't Want To Configure Your App!
Hacker News Title: Don't Configure Applications
Many people, myself included, prefer pages which are not responsive. They require extra work to create, and a lot more work to get universally right. As an example, this page attempted to be responsive, but it loads like this one my phone: http://i.imgur.com/AJwaDWQ.png

Even then, all it usually saves a phone user is a double tap to zoom into the article.
I understand all that, that's not enlightening. I am well aware of the emotional motivations behind the position.

They dropped in my estimation because they allowed this emotional reaction to endanger their children.
Hot Lotto Fraud Scandal
Hopefully that will be a good lesson that will hit the next group of young and bright eyed developers.

It's not as if equity is necessarily bad, but unless you are a founder, you have ZERO control over what is going to happen to your equity. If the plan is not to exit after just a few years, you could be stuck for a long time, if just because without an IPO, you won't even be able to keep your equity if you leave, even if it's just because you can't pay the taxes.

I think that educating recent graduates about what are the realistic outcomes of betting on equity. For every early google employee, there are thousands of people whose equity was worth nothing. Even options in big companies can be worth nothing, if they were handed to you at very high prices.

When people learn the real risks, we'll see employees getting either a whole lot more equity, or salaries will go up. Either way, good for the industry.
AFAIK, much of the Firefox UI is written in JS. FF and Chrome extensions are too.
Yeah, if you're trying to navigate from a planet's position, say at sea, the elegant heliocentric diagram is the height of uselessness and unnecessary complexity.
The article divides programming languages into two groups: Those that require you to manage memory manually and those that rely on language level managed memory. However, the examples of the managed memory languages also rely on language level Virtual Machines and/or JITs (which are critical to achieving excellent performance in those respective languages). Then, the article points out that the people using these "garbage collected languages" (which are also JITed (in a VM likely)) tend to have problems debugging performance issues. If he's right, then the examples aren't making the case very convincingly because the realm of languages with garbage collection isn't divided granularly enough in his analysis. The result is attributing the problem to a common language feature that they all share, without acknowledging that they also all share other very important features.

I'd never claim that understanding memory usage/allocation/freeing isn't important. It's important to understand how memory is used whether that be understanding how your collector handles generations of memory in a GC'd language, or whether it be understanding how your programming patterns cause a waterfall of destructor chains in a manually managed language. Often, understanding these things is difficult.

My claim was that, in my experience, the biggest difficulties in debugging performance were in understanding JIT heuristics in language level Virtual Machines. This is because (especially in dynamic languages) the heuristics aren't documented anywhere, they're subject to change, and are likely not consistent between particular runtimes you're hosted within. (Those optimizations you made just for V8, could even hurt perf if you run your library in JSC).

There's also the issue with language level virtual machines in that they usually impose some system wide tax on many operations (a layer of indirection), so I could see the people mentioned in the article having a hard time squeezing out that last portion of performance due to that indirection - again, that might be the fault of there being a language level Virtual Machine - and not necessarily as much related to memory (it depends on your application, and amount you allocate, of course).

In my experience, optimizing collection behavior has been relatively straightforward in comparison and the techniques you learn for one collector seem to translate to others. Perhaps my experience is biased towards JIT/VM/GC in dynamic languages where the JITs are so much more complex in comparison.

I have seen core hot paths in critical client side JS libraries be slowed down 9x because of obscure JIT deopts caused by properties names beginning with a dollar sign. I'm not just talking about a 9x slowdown of field lookups - our entire end to end benchmarks tanked (since fixed). Perhaps the VM architects decided that something with a leading dollar sign would not likely benefit from being made into a hidden JIT class? I've never had anything so obscure happen with any kind of garbage collection, whether that be reference counted ARC, or a tracing collector.
Edit: spelling
It's apparently resonating with the HN audience. I've seen poorly presented material get flagged into null before, so why wouldn't that be the case for this article, if it t'were true?

I am _not_ glad to see the title change, as it goes against the stated rule of titles matching the title of the submitted content and is blatant editorializing that is supposedly verboten on HN. It's ridiculous and unwelcome from my perspective. Especially since it's a multi-billion dollar company involved who can certainly deal with some mild criticism.
Unfortunately, I'm not lucky enough.

I'm not defending anti-vaccination beliefs. All I'm saying is that with all the moral bankruptcy of our governments, corporations and journalists, it's no surprise movements like anti-vaccination started to appear. I believe the core issue has nothing to do with facts, or people being "dumb" or uneducated - that it's mostly about lack of trust in authorities. And so we won't solve it by throwing even more scientific papers at the antivaxx crowd.
That was indeed the state of the art in Galileo's time. Heliocentrism wasn't necessarily more elegant, because it left open problems such as why people don't fly off the earth, and why the oceans don't slosh around uncontrollably. From what I've read, the Church was prepared to accept the model of Tycho Brahe, in which the sun goes around the earth, and the planets around the sun, which is yet another equivalent view within that conception of reality.

Newton gave us a couple of things. First, as you say, he gave us a model of gravity. Secondly, he gave us the framework within which to test whether the earth is rotating or not, e.g., through observations of things like Foucault's pendulum, and the Coriolis force.
Thanks for this link! Haven't watched a good Crockford talk in a while.
The short version is that p-values have nothing to do with establishing a causal mechanism. It's a test of statistical significance, it doesn't try to say if that significance is because x causes y or y causes x or some unknown variable z causes both y and x.

The long version: So, in this case, we have two variables, Metacritic score (or Rotten Tomatoes percentage) and box office gross. We have measured the correlation between them for some number N of movies. N is smaller than the total population of movies that could be evaluated; if nothing else, the analysis doesn't consider movies that haven't been released yet. So the movies evaluated are considered, for the purposes of a p-value test, to be a sample of size N from a hypothetical infinite population of movies with box office gross and Metacritic scores. The p-value test also assumes that there's something called a null hypothesis, which is that there is no relationship between Metacritic scores and box office gross. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that all other hypothesises (is that the right plural? I don't know) are evaluated against.

What the p-value measures (in this case, it can be applied to other statistics as well) is the probability of seeing a correlation of that size or greater given a random sample of N observations if the null hypothesis is true. What's notable about this is that the p-value is not testing anything about any hypothesis other than the null hypothesis -- it can be used as evidence about the likelihood of the null hypothesis being true, but past that it has nothing to say about any OTHER hypothesis. Which is why it's wrong to say that a p-value test is evidence of a causal relationship -- it's not even trying to test that.
Good point. Yeah, it's true... sitting for long periods is actually uncomfortable for me. Not just at work, but also on planes and in cars.
I'd like to, but it isn't exactly fresh in my mind (35 years ago), and I am concerned about trade secrets. Most people are bored by my Boeing stories :-)

But I share your enjoyment of engineering stories. For example, I love reading about how the Wrights conquered their engineering problems one by one, and get annoyed when the author doesn't know his way around engineering and compensates by writing about the Wrights' love lives. Argh.
That doesn't even include any CPU bugs deliberately installed as backdoors.[1]

[1] http://www.eteknix.com/expert-says-nsa-have-backdoors-built-...
I pair program with one of my friends for 4 hours one evening a week every single week for the last couple months. I intend to do this forever. We are incredibly productive, pairing forces you to focus, it is an incredible knowledge sharing mechanism, and we are absolutely steamrolling through things we have to learn and yaks we ought to shave. And it's on the calendar, it's repeatable, we never miss even when neither of us really have the energy to work, something about two peoples combined energy gets us in the zone instantly every single time.
> proven tech entrepreneurial ex-pats

I was interested in this claim, so I googled you. Your LinkedIn indicates that you worked at a bakery for a long time. What are your tech ventures that we could look up?
Most of them are not that elliptical. When put to scale, they difference is almost negligible. For example Mercury has a 23.8Gm difference (51.7%) which sounds like a lot but that's 4 times less than Neptune's 80Gm difference (1.79%) and only 0.5% of Neptune's distance.

* Mercury max 69.8 Gm :: 46.0 Gm :: 51.7%

* Venus max 108.9 Gm :: min 107.5 Gm :: 1.30%

* Earth max 152.1 Gm :: min 147.1 Gm :: 3.40%

* Mars max 249.2 Gm :: min 206.7 Gm :: 20.6%

* Jupiter max 816.0 Gm :: min 740.6 Gm :: 10.2%

* Saturn max 1,509 Gm :: min 1,350 Gm :: 11.8%

* Uranus max 3,008 Gm :: min 2,742 Gm :: 9.70%

* Neptune max 4,540 Gm :: min 4,460 Gm :: 1.79%
What evidence have you that 'US' levels of consumption are unsustainable? This seems to be a modern article of faith since Malthus.
Xeon E5 and E7 are always longer because getting SMP working reliably can reveal all sorts of bugs that never arise when you have One True Processor Die.