skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hello!

Our mission at Coding House is to provide a viable alternative to higher education; one that does not result in crippling debt and teaches the real world skills necessary to get a job - in a fraction of the time.

We recognize that our program may not be for everyone. Periodically, a student may decide to leave or will be asked to leave. We work hard to separate amicably and to support that student with a hassle-free, dignified exit as we did in this instance.

This student (in our first cohort ever) was unable to successfully complete the program due to a number of reasons. About half of these were our fault and we have taken full responsibility to ensure we don't repeat those same mistakes. The other half were a result of the student's actions (or inactions) that ultimately contributed to an unsuccessful outcome.

We have since held more than ten cohorts with over 85 students. All but a handful of them got high paying jobs after completing our program. We have also modified our price structure from $15,000 upfront (what's known as the pay and pray method) to 18% of their first year's salary (with a down payment).

We don’t break even until our students get a job. Because of this, we assume the majority of the risk for our students (skin in the game). This guarantees an incentive for us to do everything in our power to make sure our students are technically competent and able to articulate well in a job interview, and that we will help them get a great job so we can get paid as well.

Thank you.

- Nick James, CEO The Coding House Institute
On the contrary, it's meaningless to view this only through psychology. Was the monk who self-immolated in Vietnam depressed? Psychology doesn't have the vocabulary in place to understand political emotions, and the only people who insist that political emotions don't exist are people who would prefer you didn't have them.

This action is inseparable from the politics that created it -- that's why people talk about politics in its context. Was it a cold action that hurt his wife and the people closest to him? Yes. But was it also a bold humanitarian move that made him a hero in Vietnam? Yes. It's possible for something to be both political and personal, and this article didn't try to oversimplify that.

How about a different lesson? That unnecessary war causes untold suffering.
Prediksi Liverpool vs. Manchester United
America’s Great Fitness Divide
Edited post with math.
In a very real sense, though, isn't it all bullshit? I mean, it depends on whether you choose to accept or reject the current Matrix as normative human life, but there is an argument to be made.

For instance, it is kind of funny to say this or that company is more or less bullshitty, when the whole structure is such that requires the masses to work for some company, else essentially be deprived of the resources required for their subsistence. So, most people will have to earn their subsistence by participating in a scheme that allocates more to someone else's subsistence.

Maybe it's the best we can do, but on that scale, the bullshittiest company of all is only marginally more bullshitty than the least.
The Saudis are no angels. They proselytize their form of radical Islam around the world. Internally, they are a repressive oligarchy ruled by the royal family and the radical clerics. Private donors from Saudi Arabia contribute a huge amount to terrorism. These are huge problems and the Saudis shouldn't get a pass on it, but it's not comparable to the Iranian government sponsoring civil wars across the Middle East to build itself an empire.
I agree, of course. And is it reasonable to say "they were reaching for my gun" or "they were moving toward me" or "I felt threatened"? These all seem like well-practiced platitudes.

But having said that, I'm not sure that I would be much different if I were in their shoes. I travel - so I've spent time in bad parts of Jersey and Chicago. I would probably be doing the same thing to justify whatever I was doing to keep myself safe - including categorizing everybody as "the enemy".

We need to find and address root causes - patching symptoms won't work.
Apply analogy to any construction work. I can build a house with terrible foundations. It may work right now, but sooner or later you're going to need to change it before it collapses. And the price of doing so is much, much greater than properly building it at first.

Same thing happens with software. Yeah, it works now, but the cost of the 10-dev team required to maintain it after is going to end up being a greater cost than properly writing software (if there is such as thing.)
Without evidence (from reputable news sources outside of USA), I'm going to have to ignore your claims. Sounds like the propaganda US politicians spew. Iran has a long history of supporting freedom fighters (terrorists if you're on the other side), but so has Saudi Arabia... and they were responsible for 9/11, which pretty much trumps all else.
I've been thinking about it a lot and there's something seriously off in this "prevention-based" approach to political correctness.

People can get offended at all sorts of things. Maybe some girls will be offended at people saying "guys" gender-neutrally. A lot of women won't.

Are you going to write bots to prevent all possible verbal offences? What if some of those bots offend people themselves, what do you do then?

I find it interesting you mention the nondiscriminatory aspect of a bot as a feature. To me it's one of the most disturbing parts, and it's what creates the "passive aggressiveness" I was talking about. If you have a problem with the way I say something, you can be upfront about it with me and I'll change my behaviour. Writing a bot for it is quite a backhanded way of getting me to do something, with less chances of succeeding (and if anything, more chances of continuing out of spite).

Like I said though, all this is personal take. Maybe everybody at your company is fine with this. However, I did show this little post around and got a near-unanimous reaction similar to mine, which reinforces what I thought before: It is highly likely there's people at your company who think this is far more than "a silly nudge", and the bot would then have a completely counter-productive effect to its original intent.
Why do young people not have cancer? (save for rare genetic forms).
Here is an idea.

On long escalators, mark some of the stairs in a particular color at regularly spaced intervals. Those are the designated "rest stairs".

Someone walking up who changes their mind (temporarly or for the rest of the ride) just finds a green stair, and moves over to the standing spot to let those behind pass.

Rest stairs can be spaced reasonably sparsely so as not to cut into capacity too much or annoy people, and would only be featured on the long escalators where this is a problem.

Maybe some people give up on the idea of walking up the long escalators in rush hour because they don't want to hinder someone who is faster.
Use GitHub Webhooks and Commit Status API to Control Pull Requests Reviews
Sorry, you're right that 2FA accounts will not receive the email. I've updated my comment.

In addition to the TOR IP block, you can also restrict it to only allow access from select countries. This is what I meant by geographic restriction.
On a zoomed-out log scale of significance from 0 to infinity, bullshit activities would rank almost equally important as non-bullshit activities. So just let life happen. Nothing you do is extremely consequential or important regardless.

If you're stuck in traffic, you could've been reading a book. If you were reading a book, you could've been cleaning your room. If you were cleaning your room, you could've been working on a side project. If you were doing that, you could've been working on a better side project to get rich. But that would be less important than curing cancer, which is less important than curing old age. However, even curing old age pales in significance to the fact that entropy will dissipate all energy in the universe. How are you going to prevent that? And what if there's multi-verses that need to be fixed too somehow. You didn't fix the past either. Maybe you should've worked on a time machine instead of solving entropy problems. And what about all those people in poverty getting malaria because you were working on some b.s. problem?

It never ends. You could go crazy dwelling on this stuff too much.
Iraq, for that matter. They suffered under severe sanctions and a no-fly zone that left part of the country beyond the control of the state for over a decade and Saddam was nowhere near being overthrown until the US and allies actually invaded (again).
Most likely, 'vita brevis'.
Saudi oil revenue has already sunk below government expenditures[1]. The just-announced 2016 budget has a deficit of $87 billion[2]. That's 7 years to go until the reserves are gone.

And how much does the House of Saud hand out to its citizens to keep things calm and orderly? What happens when that money starts to dry up?

[1] http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-saudi-budget-expected-to-be-...

[2] http://english.alarabiya.net/en/special-reports/saudi-budget...
A bit of a nitpick. It says, "Stress is always part of a happy life and a stress-free life is not automatically a happy one."

Not only is a stress-free life not automatically a happy one, but by the first half of the sentence, it cannot be a happy life.
If you want to learn about this stuff for yourself, this Wikipedia article is a good starting point, you are rightly skeptical about such a controversial issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...
African American Women Worked as Some of NASA's First Computers
Many around the world would consider the USA worse in this regard than iran
> He visited Iran and was carefully stage managed to present only the positive side of things and completely ignore the rest.

The US govt has been "informing" us about the negative side of things for decades. We had nothing new to learn about that side. To show us the other side was what was and is needed.
Summary:

- Poses the hypothesis that "Life is short"

- Proposes an 'objective' basis for this feeling: some of his most meaningful life events happen 8 or less times

- Transitions that the shortness of life justifies avoiding "bullshit," while acknowledging that's a loaded term.

- Proposes examples of "bullshit," traffic jams, unnecessary meetings, bureaucracy, and arguing online.

- Suggests arguing online is an example of a habit that is addictive, yet bullshit.

- Defines bullshit as things that won't matter to you in the future upon reflection.

- Proposes ways to avoid bullshit

- Proposes a way to savor time

Analysis:

- I'm not sold on the metric of measuring something by how much we value it upon reflection.

- I don't think the premise "Life is short" needs to be established to justify "avoid bullshit."

- The argument is fairly loose in that 99.9% of our lives are bullshit by his definition. Is 99% of sex bullshit?

Interesting piece, smarter than your average bear.
So it is today technically possible to run a gene therapy in adult humans via CRISPR and some recent innovations in vectors with a good expectation that tissue coverage is going to be what you want it to be - i.e. enough cells take up changes for it to work. (See for example http://today.duke.edu/2015/12/crisprmousedmd for the good tissue coverage angle).

This is going to be next year's medical tourism, analogous to the progression of stem cell therapies from the turn of the century.

There are a few really obvious candidates, such as myostatin and follistatin to greatly increase muscle growth - and at least one person who has had that done already, c.f. BioViva. To do this all you need are the connections. Buy into a biotech startup company, make the arrangement with a lab in Mexico or Thailand and off you go. If you knew the right people, you could be on a plane tomorrow and the beneficiary of elective gene therapy the day afterwards.

It can't be overstated how easy CRISPR makes this. It is easier even than induced pluripotency, and that spread like wildfire through the labs when it emerged.

The more interesting thing to me is that there are probably a hundred less obvious, poorly studied, poorly followed up, but very interesting genetic alterations that could be done, and probably will be done largely outside the institutions of medical research. This is what happens when cost falls. Any single gene is fair game now. Want great resistance to ischemia/reperfusion injuries? Knock out PHD1 [1]. Want your aged liver to function as well as it did when you were young? Add more lysosomal receptors. [2] Want to have permanent operation of the benefits of fasting and exercise in the form of upregulated autophagy? Increase AMPK levels [3]. And so on and so forth through scores of genes. Maybe many of them will work as the studies suggest, maybe not.

[1]: http://www.vib.be/en/news/Pages/-VIB-researchers-discover-po...

[2]: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/science/06cell.html

[3]: http://www.salk.edu/news-release/how-the-cells-power-station...
>Many around the world would consider the USA worse in this regard than iran

Many people think many things, many of them are wrong. What do you think?
The fallacy of mood affiliation (2011)
Well, in the Iranian situation there is already more democratic than China. I hope that because the Iranian liberals were the ones that negotiated this deal, although with permission of the Supreme Leader, it will bolster the liberal's standing in the country even further and increase their credibility and their openness to the rest of the world.
<a href="https://www.seancassidy.me/images/lastpass_login.png"><img src="/images/lostpass_login.png"

I clicked on the thumbnail to examine it more closely, and was briefly confused, then amused that it pointed to the real one.

I think this quite nicely shows why hiding the URL scheme is NOT a good idea; otherwise it would show this, which is far more obvious to indicate that the page is either from the extension or not:

http://chrome-extension.pw/:/...
chrome-extension://...

Ironically, it wasn't that long ago when browser designers thought completely hiding the URL bar was a good idea.
I'm truly sorry to hear you work at such an awful place that you might consider this acceptable, let alone understandable.
A common part of many cons is to not just get the mark to accept the offer that looks to benefit them, but to make them feel they are doing something good at the same time. There are people who will resist doing the moral thing when it doesn't benefit them, there are people who will resist doing the thing that benefits them if it's not moral, but there's very few that will resist something that offers both. It's a double whammy, right to our reward centers.
> Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, the Taliban, these are just some of the groups that Iran has funded

The US has funded most of those very same groups, only at different points in time.
PiXORD Corporation
"allowing Iran to export even more oil keeps the price of crude down on the floor"

That's probably the best case scenario for the rest of the world. Cheap energy and keep the amount of money middle eastern countries have to fight each other to a minimum.
There is no percentage upon which to calculate. The reality that is this star is unknown to us. So there is a broad range of possibilities. Aliens is somewhere in that broad range, but as points within a range of knowns, the likelihood is incalculable. It's a few fixes points against an infinity. Bayesian is inappropriate in such circumstances.
If you are looking to do more persisted research around a domain or ip address, consider checking out PassiveTotal (https://www.passivetotal.org) . We draw in a lot of the same free feeds, but also have the most comprehensive passive dns aggregation out there, and let users pivot on Whois and ssl certificate data from Internet scans. API is documented and available to use for all account types. We also host free Maltego transforms if you want more of a graph analysis solution.
I think the biggest thing is to start very small. Seriously, very very small. I had for years done more or less what you describe. So I finally just decided to start super baby simple and have one tiny little goal and accomplish it. For me it was hard to eliminate looking up my news sites when I had a free minute or two. Eventually, I just deleted my bookmarks and edited my /etc/hosts and that did the trick for me.

But I didn't try to cut out those distractions and start a workout routine at the same time.

Also I didn't try to start anything else until the last goal had become kind of routine (like brushing your teeth in the morning).

There are still many things on my list to see and do and there's still stress in my life, but I feel with this method of one micro step at a time you slowly chip away in unnoticeable steps until now for me a little over a year later you've made a big noticeable dent.

oh yea, I finally quit smoking too :)

EDIT: most of my goals also had to do with eliminating stress. For instance, my "learning the language" was to just turn on the radio and listen to interesting talk shows in swedish and occasionally look up words, all which was very relaxing for me. My exercise is swimming which is super enjoyable for me and something I always look forward to (even when I didn't have the time to do it). I don't know what it would be like if you do not actually look forward to or enjoy your goals...
This article talks about an ISIS chat app: http://techcrunch.com/2016/01/16/isis-app/
> Why isn’t anyone holding universities accountable for their press releases?

It's about time. Maybe in the future, universities will adopt ethics guidelines that will oblige them to say, "Here's another social science study of dubious provenance, one that, based on a now-famous survey of similar past studies [1], is more likely to be false than true."

[1] http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-f...
We subscribe to both Blue Apron and Home Chef. I've always fancied getting into "cooking", but never knew where to start. With these services I've explored new techniques, equipment, and ingredients that I probably never would have otherwise. The recycling problem is improving, as Blue Apron will let you send back packing and refrigeration materials postage paid.
Why "or"? Can't it be both?
I think every human can identify with this.

I think it's time for us to start questioning if we really "Want" to do these things so much (exercise) why we don't do them. Do we just want to have done them (it'd sure be nice if I had a nice bod, I should workout. I should learn 12 languages and 3 instruments too!)? Or do we think we want them? Or is there some perverse reason why our body keeps us from doing what we truly want to do in that moment?
Who controls your Facebook feed
What's the deal with this whole push for democracy? (nevermind, checked your company, I see your angle now). As if it's the holy grail of form of governments? Yeah, democracy really turned India around..

Food for thought:
Would you rather be an Indian living in India, or a Chinese living in China?
And for a completely different perspective, we have Kurt Vonnegut:

[Vonnegut tells his wife he’s going out to buy an envelope] “Oh, she says well, you’re not a poor man. You know, why don’t you go online and buy a hundred envelopes and put them in the closet? And so I pretend not to hear her. And go out to get an envelope because I’m going to have a hell of a good time in the process of buying one envelope. I meet a lot of people. And, see some great looking babes. And a fire engine goes by. And I give them the thumbs up. And, and ask a woman what kind of dog that is. And, and I don’t know. The moral of the story is, is we’re here on Earth to fart around. And, of course, the computers will do us out of that. And, what the computer people don’t realize, or they don’t care, is we’re dancing animals. You know, we love to move around. And, we’re not supposed to dance at all anymore.”
Now if only we could do away with the double standard and hold Isreal responsible for their nuclear escapades[0] too.

0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel
Depends on the question you ask. "What's interfering with this star's light?" is one question. "Can we find evidence suggestive of any other civilizations, specifically the kind who could build Dyson spheres?" is another.
I have to admit Hindi muhavare (aphorisms) are pretty awesome. I hadn't heard of the one they quoted but some of my favorites are

ghore bech kar sona - sleep like you sold horses (sleep soundly)

(nak) chana chabwana -to make someone chew chickpeas with their nose (to give someone a (very hard) time)

munh tor ke jawab dena - to break someone's face in answer (to give a fitting/equal reply)

unt ki munh men zira - cumin in a camel's mouth (peanuts, trifling, nothing, in the Zia to Carter sense)

dudh men mengni dalna - to put scat in the milk (poisoning the well (in rhetoric))

bandar kya jane adrak ka swad - What does a monkey know of ginger's taste? (ie. pearls before swine)

Nach na jane aangan terha - Can't dance? Crooked stage. (A poor workman blames his tools)
> ... "Scientists link coffee drinking to smart gene!"

Complete agreement, especially with respect to the word "link", which seems ideally suited to exploit public ignorance of the fact that a link means a correlation, not a cause-effect relationship.
From PG's essay "Economic Inequality": "Most people who get rich tend to be fairly driven. Whatever their other flaws, laziness is usually not one of them... Variation in productivity is far from the only source of economic inequality, but it is the irreducible core of it, in the sense that you'll have that left when you eliminate all other sources."

This feels like the heart of that particular essay and displays a rather breathtaking misunderstanding of poverty, its causes and its inhabitants. This blames poor people for being poor.

How am I misreading this? I don't feel like I'm cherry-picking, I feel like I'm finding the theme of the text. If that's not it, then what is its theme? Its central idea?

From later in the same essay: "Louis Brandeis said 'We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.' That sounds plausible. But if I have to choose between ignoring him and ignoring an exponential curve that has been operating for thousands of years, I'll bet on the curve."

Again: this sounds like PG saying "In the choice between fostering political power in people at large and concentrating money in the hands of those who already have it, I'll choose the latter." What's there to misinterpret?

I thought this essay, without context, was very sweet. Life is too short. But read as a non-response to critics of the "Income Inequality" essay it takes on a callous tone.
Make your Jersey
I am surprised that in London right side of escalator was reserved for non-walking travelers.

British drive on the left side of the road, so more natural tradition would be to stay on the left side of escalator and run on the right.