skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Car-->fridge distance matters a hell of a lot to her.

That's interesting, is there a particular reason for this or is this a nice illustration of 'first world problems'?

To have both a car and a fridge, the money to stock the fridge and then to trip over the distance from the car to the fridge (which can easily be made light enough by using a luggage trolley or by asking the s.o. to assist) as a major stumbling block in the selection of housing is something I never considered possible. I see a lot of good reasons for wanting to live in an actual house rather than in an apartment building (I'm living in an apartment building at the moment for the first time in 40 years) but that one never occurred to me.
They also don't work. Some of the first-generation drugs were pretty safe (and reasonably effective), but they fell out of favor.
- SENS & Aubrey, definitely. Rejuve!

- Somewhat counter intuitively, it works to fund soft subjects like politics, sociology and governance -- because humans have the capacity to create physical technologies we don't have the social technologies to be able to use without a loss of social harmony. This capacity gap is an important opportunity for vigorous research and invention of new social & governance technologies, which don't just include things like digital forms, and also encompass the notions behind the ways we organize and talk about our societies and their purpose. Without funding to advance the conceptual basis of governance and society, the alternative is to rely on advanced military power to provide a guarantee of stability, which is also necessary, and in the long term alone insufficient to create the kind of societies it works to create.

- Military technology, because hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and protect what's valuable.

- Alternative propulsion, because everything depends on transportation networks. The faster we can turn space transport from "horse and carriage" through "steam age" to "high speed rail", the faster we create more wealth -- to fund everything else.
So, the short read here is, one (arguably poorly thought out) complex system interacts with another (again, arguably poorly thought out) complex system in unthought about ways... Why is anyone surprised?

I'm no fan of systemd or Poettering, but this behavior is consistent for unix, root can do anything, including break peripherals or hardware thru poorly advised actions - why is this a big to do?
Sane distributions don't include that alias by default.
Because otherwise people will always use `rm -f` and lose the feature that `rm` asks before removing files marked as read-only.
zika
Even worse yet is when people do

if some_function(arg, arg2):
result = True
else:
result = False

return result

Obviously a waste of time and lines of code. Instead, do

return some_function(arg, arg2)

Unless anything else needs to be done with the result of some_function but that's not the case I'm talking about, I'm talking about when it looks like above.
The other thing about slashdot that's nice is you can't moderate a discussion in which you're taking part.
Adoption is doing pretty well. In just over 2 weeks since its release lodash@^4.0.0 is in the top 50 most depended on npm packages.
Good point.

To be fair, I also just hate Apple and wish they would go out of business and leave all their consumers with a tough choice: Windows, *BSD, or GNU/Linux.

Serves 'em right for using an Apple product.
> So how do we build a more decentralized economy ? What are the missing building blocks ?

Venture capital companies are normally in the opposite business, they want to create monopolies.

As for '4', this report might shed some light on that:

http://worldhappiness.report/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015...
The Riemann Hypothesis! Hear me out, because I think it could serve as a great model for modern math research and collaboration.

One thing that really bothered me during my PhD is that even at the Stanford math department it felt like academia is not set up to encourage work on big questions, nor is it optimal for any objective function I can think of. Is it any wonder that many of the recent breakthroughs (Perelman with Poincare, Zhang with prime gaps) came not from establishment mathematicians, but ones who couldn't or wouldn't play the academia game and ended up almost destitute on the fringes, working away at these problems that they knew inside could be resolved.

Now, why specifically is the Riemann Hypothesis a great place to start? Math problems are like a maze. There are many paths to take, and while you can take satisfaction in exploring one part, you won't know your progress until you see the exit in front of you. In the case of RH the branch factor is absolutely massive, but once you pick a direction, it doesn't take long (relatively) to get to the forefront of what's known. But as it stands it is very hard to get perspective on the problem, or know which ways are good or bad. A mathematician who is not an expert in the field may experiment with various ways of bounding Zeta away from zero, but a domain expert would right away point out positive vertical density results for all a-sets, and bounds on moments of 1/zeta(s). Worse: if you have an idea for a new approach, there's no good way to share it because it will likely be too small for the quantum of academia: the academic paper. Building a collaborative atlas for the Riemann Hypothesis would help solve both of these problems, and could provide a more structured way of working on hard problem than even the polymath projects. It'll be a challenging use-case but at least with 150 years' of work there will be no cold start problem. And I've seen many analytic number theorists who are incredibly smart, hard-working, insightful, great with programming, happy to get their hands dirty, eager to teach others, but neglected by the system and lacking an outlet for their skills. PS: There's still no clear reason to believe RH to be true rather than false.
> Certain people claiming to be engineers have optimized on finding out what you're trying to accomplish and either blocking it or taking credit for it

This is not universal, perhaps you ought to stop working for dysfunctional organizations

> The best policy for an engineer is the one I described

Again, not universally applicable. It might be the best policy for brogrammers.
Apparently a mobile app becomes a Mac app when you add the "traffic light" window controls to the top-left corner.

What particularly irritates me is that these concepts show tiny little apps floating on an empty desktop. Which Mac user has a single app running at a time?

In the real world, a Mac app will be overlaid on top of dozens of other windows. And then all those blur backgrounds turn into grey smudges, because the content of the underlying windows is mostly text.
First line treatment for depression is not medication but a short course of talking therapy.
No, it would cause a lot of un-necessary procedures and visits to doctors.
Cool, thanks :) I agree that comparing dictation speed to typing speed is a different question if you're a fast typist. On a phone, it's no contest -- for me, even in my native language, dictating with Siri is vastly quicker -- but I wouldn't actually want to dictate when I write comments online, for instance.

When dictating, you also hit the classical problem of your thoughts not forming fast enough to be able to formulate yourself in writing in real time, leading to a lot of breaks as you dictate. The guideline "think, then speak" of radio communication also holds for dictation, in my experience.
>> Wonder what this guy would say to the countless millions who toil away in
factories, big box retail, and accounting offices. None of these people do this
for the love of the job. They do it because it needs to be done and they get
paid for it.

There's always someone doing worse than you do. I'm a programmer
now but in a previous life I fed conveyor belts. I did menial jobs most of my
life until I migrated and graduated (and, yep, got a student loan to repay). I thought I had it bad, but I once saw a
video of a boy diving into a midden with a stick to unclog it. No joke- he dove
into a big hole in the ground filled with shit. He had a rope tied round his
waist and a stick.

So what do you say to that boy? "Stay where you are because think of all those
countless minions who don't even have a stick"?

No, people will always want to do better. We'll always want our every working
hour to be productive and fullfilling. And as well we should. We should strive
to achieve that.

So, speaking as one of those countless minions, I'm glad that I could escape the
Hell of One-Thousand Soul-Crushingly Meaningless Tasks, and I don't wish anyone
to use my sojourn there to keep anyone in their place.
Figure out a way to break translational research out of the academic science model at scale! There is currently a huge decoupling of supply and demand in academia, especially in life sciences which is my home domain. Incredibly talented individuals are forced to invest 6-14 years building the credentials necessary to apply for grant funding / self-sufficiency, all the while (at best) earning what a new grad would make if they became a tech in pharma straight out of college. Most people cycle out before hitting their prime, at the expense of our economy.

This decoupling between supply and demand has also motivated other negative trends, such as changes in employment incentives for labs (large push for postdocs / foreign students at the expense of grad students); increasing importance of publishing in high impact, for profit journals (more paywalling of knowledge); sabotage of the peer review process; and a deliberate siloing of what should be public knowledge to prevent "competition" (among other things).

Ultimately I see most basic science being performed in an institute model existing in parallel to academia. In such a model, investigators should own their own ip, would have their salaries uncapped, and would be able to employ qualified people at a fair market wage. In my eyes, the biggest barrier to enacting such a model is startup capital. Most universities give new faculty members a "startup package"; essentially an angel investment to allow them to buy equipment / reagents and pay salaries before they need to support themselves off of grant funding. A new institute would not have the capital required to support this (unless it received extensive funding from foundations / industry / NIH etc).

I envision crowd funded startup packages with caveats. One potential model could mimic angel investment / old school patronage: an investigator receives $X in exchange for a percentage ownership of whatever IP they create within Y years, distributed among the investors. Another model could mimic kickstarter: people crowd fund an investigator with small investments and are rewarded by being part of the process. They are given regular updates, walked through experiments / data, invited to the lab if they are local to see work being done etc. I'm sure other funding mechanisms exist that I have not considered. I would love to chat further about this issue if you are interested; please feel free to contact me.
Продать, купить, квартиру и дом, Кривой Рог, недвижимость
That appears to validate my belief that only Google can competitively take the Linux kernel and build atop it a software stack known as a desktop/mobile/user operating system.

And if my assertion that intention prediction and voice search will be competitive features for users, features that rely on mass data collection and expensive top talent, then I think organizations like Canonical or RedHat will fall behind in the desktop/mobile/user os space.
On one episode of BSD Now[1], Bryan Cantrill tells how they made 'rm -rf /' not work on Solaris. It seems like a good idea in that they managed to stay compliant to POSIX while disarming that particular foot seeking-missile.

Or, in other words: I agree completely, in fifteen years I have never used 'rm -rf /', I always used mkfs to create fresh filesystem.

[1] http://www.bsdnow.tv/episodes/2015_08_19-ubuntu_slaughters_k...
On the other hand I was happy and welcoming of systemd then I started to experience way too many breakage due to attitude of the devs.

When you have to spend 2 days to get to a remote server room and back because suddenly systemd decided that a device in fstab not present at boot would halt boot with error and at the same time the emergency shell was broken and going into a loop of asking for credentials, on a debian server, in production.

Ok systemd works most of the time but after experiencing a few of these breakages I've become wary of anything systemd.
Whatever it brings to the table is not worth the wasted time and headaches it causes.
Antibiotics are running out because we stopped researching them, for a variety of reasons, and it takes time to bring research pipelines back online.
Get us out of advertising hell.

More and more surfaces are covered with ads, they are nigh on inescapable. In my life I've seen the world go from relatively clean to visually incredibly polluted. I'd love to find a way for companies to be able to reach consumers without having to take over every surface in sight.
"What shouldn't we fund?".

Maybe fund less? Talk open minded about the SF Bubble.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/29/technology/san-francisco-bub...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10996147
Well, sort of. They don't have to answer any replies, though.

Exhaustive discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10969721

But note in particular that firms specialize in coaching companies on how to fake compliance with such laws:

story: http://www.post-gazette.com/business/businessnews/2007/06/21...

video proof:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
- I can buy forest land for less than 20$ / tree. If I go to Eastern Europe, I buy land with 10 year old oak for half that (if you buy large enough plots). Please quote a price for timber futures because your story sounds like baloney.

- 2 tablets - let's say $500 for two. A single piece of corn sells for what, 50 cents? At an expensive supermarket? Let's pretend they convinced everybody in that rural atea to pay urban prices. That means they had to sell 1000 of them, over two months, 15 a day, 7 days a week, from a roadside stall. Yeah, don't see that happening.
That's true. Most of the larger subs have voting blocs that memory-hole your comments if you don't agree with the mob no matter how reasonably you word disagreement.

Besides, what's the point of commenting on something that already has 700 comments? Nobody is going to read it.
Read the post carefully. "Parse Server" isn't the actual Parse server. It's a reference implementation of many features.
This is a great use of the NSA/GCHQ.

From a global security perspective, we absolutely want to know if Germany is about to deal with Russia. If we can't trust their word (and Merkel's public statements can change from one month to the next) then this doesn't feel like a bad thing.

Therefore, even though she is an ally, we should bug her mobile phone.

I'm not saying you're wrong btw, but there was a large backlash concerning the bugging of Merkel's mobile phone. I doubt we'll see a similar backlash here. I find the discrepancy interesting.
I think that pretty soon features backed by machine learning and mass data collection, features like intention comprehension and prediction or voice command/search, will be commonplace and hotly desired by users.

When that happens, I don't think the Canonical or Redhat will be able to compete, and only Google will be able to create an OS on top of Linux, and open-sourcing won't do any good because the most important services will be behind Google servers.
Comment of the day- thanks :)
Renovating is more expensive than rebuilding. Renovated nice old buildings are a luxury, not a savings measure (I live in one, which we renovated ourselves - would've been cheaper and better to knock down and rebuild)
Why Bernie Sanders should have kept talking about the Nordics
Ask HN: Poor Codility performance, am I a bad programmer?
Hi HNers,

I've worked in life science research for several years. I have no formal computer science education.

I've programmed some pretty complex systems for analyzing biological data -- image analysis, advanced statistics, distributed computing clusters etc.
I always manage to get the job done.

I applied for a tech job on a whim. They directed me to a Codility interview with some puzzle questions. I didn't do as well as I had hoped. I don't often deal with those sorts of problems at work, and I don't need to think about things like O notation to do my job well.

Am I a bad programmer? Have I just been dealing with easy problems and deluding myself? Has this happened to anyone else?
What's that supposed to be good for?

It certainly doesn't remove any file contents and to get a clean state, surely reformatting would be both easier and quicker?
If we cure aging and live for centuries we will still be subject to accidents while we are trying to work out how to live without a body at all. I would be interested to know how likely it is to get maimed or killed during this extended period and how it would affect the psychology of a person. I assume it would be a pretty frightened bunch not leaving home much.
> Would you do it for animals too?

Why not? Veterinaries would love novel approaches. Plus the pre-research is always carried in animals.

> How would people remember everything?

You should ask Google's Director of Engineering (Ray Kurzweil) about that. Hint: within 25-30 years your brain could have x1000 capacity via cloud computing (mobile + brain-cloud interfaces).

> Is this just for rich people or do poor people get to live for centuries too?

Your questions are quite common and have been answered hundreds of times in any of the SENS presentations. Answer: humanity as a whole will benefit from this research.

> Haven't done the math but if 8 billion people lived for say 500 years each, plus new arrivals constantly, wouldn't we accumulate rather?

The fact that we live twice as long, and we have duplicated the human lifespan in the last 100 years (in the western world), but now we have less natality tells you something? Overpopulation comes from the 3rd world and decreases as a country starts to develop...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/currentevents/2012/10/16/warning...

> What about fertility? Should there be a window on that?

Ask Apple or Facebook why they are offering female employees to freeze their eggs for $20k...

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/15/apple-face...
Show HN: Bootstrap 4 Upgrader
Forget vinyl – better digital sound is on the way
Upgrade Bootstrap 3.* to Bootstrap 4.* in 1 click
Clojure is for Aristotelians
Now you've moved the goalposts from your original 28% figure (2 days out of 7) to trying to defend a stupidly made point by drilling into a hourly breakdown. You can't have it both ways.

An even 50/50 split would be working no more days than you live--taking the day itself as the unit of measure. By the week, that means recognizing there's something inherently off with the notion that it's at all balanced to exchange 5 days to an employer so you can get 2 days to yourself in return.

If you want to make yourself feel better by counting how many hours you can squeeze out of a day for yourself, that's fine. I doubt I'm the only person who thinks that is no way to live.

In contrast to your example that, to me, seems insanely driven by the tyranny of the clock, a different take:

There are 365 days per year. When I decided years ago I wanted to achieve work-life balance, that left 182 days for working. By the typical American work week, if I was working a job, I'd be expected to surrender 251 days (for 2016). That's 70 days too many.

So, there are 183 days of free time per year.

Some of those days, I binge-watch Netflix. I don't even know how much time that totals.

Some days, I play games all night until the sun comes up.

Some days, I dabble with some code related to something I want to play around with, experiment, learn, rebuild, whatever.

Some days, I see the computer and say, "Fuck you, computer. It's gorgeous outside."

I wake up whenever by body wakes up. I shower. Grab some food or a meal shake. Head to the gym for a couple hours. Maybe take a nap, read, or just sit and breathe.

Some days I'm just sick of being at home, so I leave. I'm not counting any hours here, so I call up some friends out of town and say I'm coming their way for a couple days. I head out of state. I leave the country. I think of who I haven't seen in a while and get together with them.

> If a company is paying you for your time, what do you expect to be doing, if not to do what the company wants you to do? If you want to not do what others want you to do, and still receive a regular pay check, that's called taking on welfare.

That's an oddly binary and ideologically ridiculous notion you have there. As if there are no other ways to exist and subsist besides welfare and doing what others want you to do to receive a paycheck. I mean, come on. This is HN. This place exists for people who don't want to do what others want them to do in exchange for a paycheck.

P.S. I never said you shouldn't be grateful for having a good life. I think it's great when people recognize how good they have things, and are genuinely grateful for it. I was picking on a very subtle but important nuance in your original statement that I felt important to highlight. It's fine if you don't get the nuance, or don't care for it. For me, I like to remember where the agency and empowerment lies in my life. I'd never be able to stand a situation in which I actually had to think that an employer gave me a couple days of my life on the weekends before coming back to work.
> You do know that every culture, since the beginning of time, has thought that they would live to be immortal in their lifetime. What makes you think you're different? Sure, you might have a better chance, but it's still a slim chance.

A slim chance is infinitely better than no chance at all. How many cultures had even the remotest chance of actually doing something about it?

And no, I'm not certain it'll happen in my lifetime. I'd say that I'd be sad and disappointed if that didn't happen, but really if that doesn't happen then I won't be anything at all. But I still consider it by far the most important problem that could possibly be solved, and worth putting incredible effort and resources towards. I also consider it worth advocating, to encourage others to push for the same goal, or at the very least discourage others from perpetuating arguments that shut down such efforts.

> Actually living forever would be a greater hell than anything I can imagine.

Then don't. But I'd suggest trying it first, or significantly expanding your imagination.

> After the first few hundred years, when you realise that it's never going to end, after you've read every book and done all you've wanted to do, what then?

With all the imagination you can bring to bear, and a universe full of possibilities, you can only think of a few hundred years worth of things to do before you'd not only get bored but get so bored you'd long for death?

To give even a minimal lower bound based on your own comment, books and stories are already being written today faster than they can be read. And that's only one of myriad possibilities. A few minutes imagination can easily produce far more interesting ones.

Do you currently get bored with life and want it to end? If not, then why do you expect that to change in only a few hundred years?
This is simply bad advice. The kind of nesting you showed will make the application non-maintainable. Your HTML gets completely locked down since its styling is dependent on things being nested in a certain way.
What has led to this opportunity in the first place? Restated: what's broken about shipping goods to Ghana and Nigeria currently that leads to high prices from the status quo shipping companies? What is the single biggest factor leading to high shipping costs?