skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your first condition is already in licenses like the Apache 2.0, GPLv3 and several other licenses. However, it isn't a requirement that "the patents are in the public domain" (mainly because such a requirement doesn't make sense, the public domain is a term used in copyright law to refer to a work with no copyright, it has nothing to do with patent law). Rather, it states that all contributors grant a "perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable" patent license to any other user of the software, provided that they do not attempt to sue a user for infringement of patents that were granted under that license.

Your second condition would make the license a proprietary licence (it violates freedom #0: the right to run the program as you wish without restriction). In addition, I'm not sure that it would enforcible with current copyright law (similar to the provisions in the AGPL), since I'm not sure you can argue that input data to a program is something that you could restrict in law (and if it's free software, the end user can modify it to allow you to break that rule). And it would also be a minefield (what if something could be patentable, or is patented by someone other than the person who distributed it, what if the patent holder gave a patent grant to the rest of humanity, how many requirements are there for such a grant in order for it to be allowed, etc).
What is the main idea being put forward in this article? I tried reading over it but I don't seem to get it. It seems to put forward certain concepts but doesn't seem to have any substance to it or even coherence.
During my PhD in economics, the first few quarters of microeconomic theory focused on what we call classical economics, which is also called partial and general equilibrium theory. These theories are definitely not zero sum games. Even though partial and general equilibrium theory don't describe economics in terms of interactions between individuals (in the classical theory, individuals interact with the market), if they did, the nature of these interactions would be that they are always strictly positive sum for all actors. E.g. consider the supply and demand curves, and imagine that for each vertical line (or horizontal, depending on how you draw the axes), you "match" the buyers and sellers along that line. Then the difference in the prices that each individual is willing to buy/sell for is the total gain for that transaction, with how the gain is distributed being determined by the equilibrium price.

Your summary seems to focus too much on early thinkers, and doesn't address the full development of classical theory which took until the 1950's.
Interesting! I've been using Soundcleod[0] for a couple years now which is basically a Fluid-style browser wrapper (with support for media keys).

[0]: http://soundcleod.com
*couldn't
Ask HN: What's a hobby?
- They say that there is more in life than work.

- They say that you must spend time with your family.

- They say that you need a hobby.

What's a hobby? Why should a person have any? What would be the purpose? That isn't clear to me.
I did a similar simulation of income/wealth distributions using US income tax rates over the past century. It was a gloriously hackish combination of a Lisp tax-rate parser, auto-generated C actor model, and R.

I sure hope more economists study these methods because the standard models in Public Economics/Taxation are hopelessly inadequate, if not negligent.

A Nobel Memorial Prize winning economist by the name of James Mirrlees came up with a theory for optimum income taxation in the 1970s that is still used by governments today. It suggested that a relatively flat tax would be optimal rather than the progressive rates then in vogue. Unfortunately, his model is hopelessly incorrect as it essentially assumes that the general shape of the (pre-tax) income distribution is constant. Its starting point is that if you tax people too much, they will just work less than their untaxed income earning potential, hindering your ability to raise taxes.

In reality, progressive tax rates alter the ability of the wealthy to accumulate capital, which alters the Pareto coefficient (power-law constant) of the high-income tail, drastically changing the number of very-wealth individuals and benefiting the bottom 90%. If you tax too regressively, wealth can concentrate and even "condense" in the wealthy -- essentially shifting all earning capacity to a few. This happens because there exist power-law coefficients for high incomes that are not integrable. Beyond a tipping point, wealth will just continue to "condense" in the wealthiest actors.

You can find detailed tax schedules and inequality data for the US for the last century. The details of the actor-interactions are not that important, much like molecular interactions do not make a qualitative difference in statistical mechanics. In fact, analytical stochastic models may be easier to calculate, although they are less flexible.

Income tax progression can explain a large part of the variation, but not all. There are other important factors such as union participation, war-time expropriation, and lending terms. Nevertheless, the income tax schedule is important and easy to change.
Problem is a two-way street. Making only $2000 a semester may deter an adjunct from 'going the extra mile'. Not that a full-time professor would do so because they're full time. However, a low wage doesn't necessarily encourage the adjunct to do more than the minimum.

Also, if you figure that the department head will just fire and hire until they find someone what will put in that extra time you're kidding yourself. They work on semester contracts, firing and hiring over and over again will be throwing too many new/untrusted people into the classroom only to start-over in another few months, not to mention the lag-time between hires. What ends up happening is the department heads will maybe bring in a new candidate the next year if there's a lot of complaints against an adjunct, but otherwise they just keep the same scheduling.
I remember reading http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/nov/24/torture..., I hope it's exaggerated.
Facebook offers tools that are more fine grained than unfriending. You can block someone, unfollow them so they don't appear in your feed, or turn off notifications for the piece of content they shared.

Exposing more controls is always a balancing act. From a user experience perspective it can add complexity to the product, this can make it feel more confusing. The privacy setting, for example is very powerful but the UI is built so that most complexity is hidden until you need it. There is also engineering debt. Once a feature is added it is very hard to remove. A setting like hiding notifications on a per-user basis would have to stay in the codebase for all time, even if Facebook decided to stop showing the UI to new users.
no, I don't think of it that way. As an example, if you moved to Silicon Valley in 1999 and made it a point to try to get a job at a cool startup, you might have at least had a chance to end up at Google as an early employee. But you had no such opportunity if you moved to Wichita, Kansas because you thought it was cheaper, or whatever the reason.
Sending emails from a Spreadsheet
And nothing better than to simultaneously note that a support of unionized cops on the street + demographics-based decline in crime soon to follow would be an almost guaranteed winning policy for re-election for a Dem.
I've been a happy user of Google Domains since closed beta. I'll never go anywhere else for domains again.
To me, this seems like the sort of project that would benefit greatly by putting an experienced project manager between the client (ie Rumsfeld) and the dev team. Other than planning meetings, I really think non-technical stake holders should never communicate directly with developers. I say that as a developer.
> new discussion formats that have largely supplanted Usenet.

I still wish that message boards/forums had a standard format and protocol, like email does, so that we could use any OS-native client apps to access them, like we do for email.

Apparently Usenet was too limited to support modern "necessities" like avatars, profiles, stickies, votes and polls, but surely they could be worked in as extensions or even an entirely new standard?
Transactions cannot be zero sum. What would the point be?

In the common case: Two people come together and trade because each feels they get more value after the transaction than before the transaction. Positive sum.

In a less common case: Two people get come together and trade because without the trade one of them would lose more than the value they spend on the transaction and the other one gains value. For example, if you have a gold watch but you are hungry and have no cash and I have food you might trade that watch for a sandwich. Also not a zero sum game. In this example a negative sum but I could imagine a positive sum where the one party gains more value than the other stands to lose after the transaction is complete. Say, you need to pay some workers on your construction crew and you have a generator that is normally worth about $50K and you sell it to me for cash at $40K. I, in turn, use that generator to do my job worth $100K that I wouldn't be able to complete without it..etc. It can get complicated.

A zero sum transaction would have one person losing the exact value the other person gains. A very odd and rare case I would guess.
Ignoring the "wake up sheeple" part of your post, let's say VICE are paid for and editorially controlled by the US government. To what end? VICE certainly has a US bias, but I'm not sure it's always "pro" US foreign policy. The VICE TV show has certainly shown me parts of the world and people I wouldn't have seen without them. If that's the CIA's doing then thanks!
There isn't and the entire story is premised on the government not giving a shit about normal crime, hell all of season 3 is about what happens when an entire police force is corrupted top to bottom.

One of my favourite shows.
Right. JSON is almost valid Python to begin with. Off the top of my head, the main differences are that JSON true needs to be True in Python (likewise with false/False, null/None). It's not that difficult.
JSON stands for JavaScript Object Notation , not Python Object Notation. Furthermore "require" is "proprietary" to nodejs, ES2015 has a different module system and it will be the official js module system.
I've worked in C++, Java, Ruby and PHP. I'm aware of what PHP has to offer and compared to the tooling in other languages PHP is anemic at best and a fractal of bad design at worst.

You're getting very tribal and Ad-hominem in your attacks because I don't share any affection for PHP and consider the whole language to be a mistake. Since PHP 5.3 things have been moving in the right direction, but it's too little too late as a language. As for tooling everything is a half assed copy of something from the Ruby ecosystem. If you have some tips for tools comparable to Pry in Ruby or any practical REPL or and interactive debugger comparable to VisualStudio or Eclipse please by all means share, but keep your worthless snipes to yourself.

I consistently find myself frustrated when working in PHP not because I've not mastered it, but because all of the other languages I've mentioned have a better developer experiences, better tooling and consistent APIs. PHP in my experience has none of these and your response and not changed my thoughts.
It's a TV show. Does it really have that much impact on day-to-day life?
I stand corrected, the presence of the Humble Store widget has not the same meaning as it used to, sadly.
Then again, in this case it might be salvageable by having an option of turning up with an ID in person. Could still be faked, but it would be a lot more work at least.
I'm not referring to judgemental-ness nearly as much as I am tenacity. It seems to be a foregone conclusion that people can't control when they have sex and that it's fruitless to suggest otherwise.

That same conclusion does not seem to apply to eating, socializing, and other base drives.
Yes, Amazon is doing it wrong. But the much bigger problem is that your bank lets fraudsters impersonate you using easily obtained information such as your name and address. It is completely backwards that you need an impenetrable wall and moat around the place where you buy books and groceries, because, once you get past it, then the place where you store all your money and get your mortgage is as easy to penetrate as a piece of tissue paper. The root cause of all identity theft are the incredibly lax security policies of the financial system.
After reading all the comments I have a few questions. How long have you been programming and what are you running from? Prolific programmers are running from something. Loneliness, low self-esteem, etc. while programming you don't think about life. GTD sounds like a miserable existance to me. I've heard/read countless articles on how to become a better programmer while reading the same amount of articles explaining burnout. How many CEOs practice being a CEO when they get home from work. How many mechanics are being a mechanic for fun when they get home? Programming is a job. Every time I hear learn a new language a year I puke a little in my mouth. How many of you remember your code 6 months down the road. Please don't push being a workaholic on the OP. The OP is normal and all the people trying to convince him/her otherwise are dillusuonal.
> given the ingredients, it most likely tastes like glue

The food reviewer did not taste the food reviewed. Sigh.

I understand this is (I think?) a quantitative/nutritional food reviewer, but I think it's lazy to not even taste the food you lambaste.
That's why addicts should only use suboxone to get over the initial, physical withdrawal symptoms and only take it for maybe a week and then taper it down. Suboxone is a far worse thing to detox from because the half life is far longer than opiates -- something like 36-48 hours.

Suboxone is a Godsend if you only use it to get over the initial w/d's
>"Canola oil [aka rapeseed oil, present in many foods] is one of the worst fats one could put in their body because it contains erucic acid that damages the heart."

FYI, reducing the erucic acid content in canola seeds it one of the main targets of canola breeding - you have to have less than 2% erucic acid and low contents of glucosinolates to qualify for the name of "canola" (it's a trademark: "Canada oil", or possibly "Can(ada)+o(il)+l(ow)+a(cid)").

Wild seeds have too much acid to be edible, cultivars have very low content of erucic acids, so I agree with you, it shouldn't be that much of a problem.
Thanks. I reached out to them. Will share my findings here, in the hope that it benefits others.
Yes, I completely agree. Travis Kalanick should have just watched and followed "I am just a bill"[1] video for instructions regarding changing labor law, prior to founding Uber.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-eYBZFEzf8
It would have been nice if this article addressed the negative consequences of these companies skirting labor laws. The only mention of this is here:

"she alleges that these firms exert the kind of control that employers would have over employees — without providing any of the benefits employees, by law, are entitled to."

But it doesn't explain what specific benefits are being withheld from employees, so I don't know what bad thing she is trying to prevent, or the magnitude of the problem, if there really is one.
I was in China and Google Maps was blocked. I hope you weren't being naughty and bypassing their firewall.
Though, I would wager that very few Swedish companies consider any of that information as a "password", as seen in the article...
One of my most magnificently grand stupid ideas was to create a strange boondoggle thing that kind of reinvented Gopher combined with the web and linked data.

The exciting action starts at 1:30 if you want to see the outcome of software developed at great expense with really no useful purpose.

Ladies and gentlemen: "NeoGopher" (New Gopher)

Essentially it let you browse through linked lists. Each list item could link on to another list or to a web page. Each list was created by about 15 lines of JavaScript which could be loaded from any web server and the data came from any HTTP web API.

(turn the sound down, the words serve only to confuse)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuSDU0JiI2c

Ahhh... so many meaningless words in the demo. Even I, who designed it, found it hard to explain what it was - today I would say "It's a linked list browser.", which is what Gopher was.

Of all the stupid ideas I have had (there have been many), re-inventing Gopher was probably the worst. What was I thinking?
Medis: Beautiful Management Application for Redis
I would tell you that my FB email address has that format, but maybe I'd be leaking too much information by doing so....
As someone who has trained customer support agents, I can attest to the fact that most agents have to be taught every scenario. If it slightly deviates from the one they have been trained on, they are clueless.

Not saying all customer support people are like this. However, majority of people are. They rely on pre-written scripts. When a question is asked, they search for the template question with the answer.
I don't think the 'National Security' aspect would result in Uncle Sam's finest B52's using Chinese 'GPS' to then end up dropping their bombs 500m off course in every instance.

That would make a good story though, a full on first strike that missed every target '500m to the East' due to some mapping oversight.

However, as for real use 'National Security', you could hide some area by making it not exist with the surrounding area stretched a bit on the map to hide the secret area. With some natural features, or even a big forest, all kinds of things could be hidden from the general public (who are important and primary 'targets' for 'National Security') if not Uncle Sam.
Google cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Tg9wyu6...
I'll try: that the last 30-40 years of innovation are the result of, not in spite of, government involvement in industry. Secondarily, that what we think of as great innovation is the result of such involvement or investment, and without which some of these companies wouldn't exist.
You've also got these guys http://neurosky.com/
The CSI Effect is a thing[0], so it is possible.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect
IIRC there is a moment of sheer terror in this talk by David Beazley [0] where he shows how to import an xml file as a python module.

0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oTh1CXRaQ0
> Canola oil is one of the worst fats one could put in their body because it contains erucic acid that damages the heart.

Terrible piece, but this comment, without references, puts the cherry on top. This guy is about as bad as Food Babe.

I'm not making any judgements on Soylent, since I am not a nutritionist. However, anyone who's actually interested in any dietary supplement, including Soylent, should read about the industry's massive lobbying to prevent regulation by the FDA. Indeed, instead of the companies having to prove that their supplements are not harmful (via clinical studies and trials), it instead falls on the 20 something FDA staff to prove that they are harmful -- against the thousands of supplements available for sale in the United States [1].

[1] http://www.marketplace.org/2016/01/19/health-care/vitamins-a...
That would be the basic standard to which all CSRs are trained to, and deviating from that is 100% deviating from protocol in almost any case, they do it for individual reasons (speed, a good customer survey, whatever)

When I trained Apple techs the clear communication was that people use pretexting for not just mundane things like credit card theft, but to commit violence against other people (especially in the case of domestic violence where they have some personal details and can try to get more).

Anything but the strategy of verify only is putting people's lives in danger.
State Disability and Unemployment Insurance
I did not claim anything about the underlying data.. The 2 dimensional embeddings were forced into the unit circle because the 'perplexity' hyper parameter for the t-sne was set too high.

From the guy who helped make t-sne:

When I run t-SNE, I get a strange ‘ball’ with uniformly distributed points?

This usually indicates you set your perplexity way too high. All points now want to be equidistant. The result you got is the closest you can get to equidistant points as is possible in two dimensions. If lowering the perplexity doesn’t help, you might have run into the problem described in the next question. Similar effects may also occur when you use highly non-metric similarities as input.
Thanks I updated my comment with the less than 2% part, makes it 50x harder to get close to the maximum safe dose!
Teaching migrants how to behave
Thanks for that. Interesting and concerning.
It's not surprising. Part of it is that the sexual appetite is particularly powerful. Part of it is because people are often weak in being able to endure (not talking repression here) the appetite when it manifests. Add to that the fact that sexual desire, when routinely gratified, can be habit forming. Then add to that a culture that obsesses over it and enables mindless sexual indulgence. Funny because lack of sex never killed a man. A lack of food can. Yet the desperate some claim to feel around sex would have you believe they were starving.

When such a greater good demands we abstain and we don't, we can justly be called selfish. It's something one needs to work on and struggle. Instead of waffling between prudery and licentiousness, one should work on one's sexual prudence (called the virtue of chastity, but the word, I fear, is uncool and infected with cooties, say the cool kids). It involves endurance, mindfulness, and possibly suffering.

Robin Williams once joked that god gave man two heads but just enough blood to operate one at a time. There's something to that.
Sounds like their civilian maps did, though:

> Worse, the maps for the masses were deliberately distorted with a special projection that introduced random variations. “The main goal was to crush the contents of maps so it would be impossible to recreate the real geography of a place from the map,” Postnikov tells me. Well-known landmarks like rivers and towns were depicted, but the coordinates, directions, and distances were all off, making them useless for navigation or military planning, should they fall into enemy hands. The cartographer who devised this devious scheme was awarded the State Prize by Stalin.
You might be amazed; printing above the industry-standard 300ppi can give you a picture you can never get close enough too, but even at more reasonable viewing distances you can tell the difference in acutance. 480 ppi is a good value for the current crop of Epsons (you'd need a RIP and a lot of farting around to do better, but you can get up to 720). It's sort of like the difference between a contact print and an optical print at the same size; there's no more detail as such at a typical viewing distance, but the edges of the details you can see are sharper.

As for the scanner, if you don't really need a car, you can always get a Flextight. (They really are that good, but they really are too expensive nonetheless.)