skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Don't forget that most of the immigration (focusing on permanent immigration - green cards) are awarded based on family reunification, not employment. Many green card categories are capped, family reunification is not (for close relatives).

Data is a bit old (2011), but this says ~50K employment GCs and ~750K based on family ties.[1]

[1]http://immigration.uschamber.com/uploads/sites/392/Summary%2...
Can you provide some links about these system level adblockers?
> You wouldn't allow OTA updates of your router or PC... Now would you?

Have you booted an internet-connected Windows 7/8 machine recently? "Here, have Windows 10, with all the privacy features built in to it switched off! (In fact we're already downloading ot for ypu even before you agree to install it, so it'll be ready as soon as you agree, isn't that _convenient?_)"
Artificial Life in Quantum Technologies
"Lesson: Read the contract."

I did a year of law school, then left because I was miserable and it was too much money to be miserable for. I did, however, take contracts, and I cannot stress this enough. Read the contract. Read it again. Anything that looks off, ask about. It might be innocent, standard, or something you don't need to worry about, but it might be important. As you mention, it's also a great signal about the intentions of the other party. Finally, anytime someone tells you something is "standard" in a contract, it's bullshit. "Standard" lease agreements (the ones you can get by Googling) regularly contain unenforceable language. The only standard elements a contract needs are: an offer, an acceptance, mutual assent to be legally bound by the terms, and consideration (the promise of an exchange of value for something else of value). Anything else in the contract doesn't have to be there.
The extra annoying part is that Apple's total lack of reputability is starting to spread to competing products - a lot of Android phones have dropped user-replaceable batteries, for instance, and a sizable amount of good Windows ultrabooks are about as repairable as MacBooks.
In 45+ states some form of non-compete is legal. Other than CA, most big states allow it. Most non-compete clauses in practice are probably unenforceable (because they are too long, cover too large an area, covers too big of a market, etc). But I'd be pretty worried about one if I wasn't in California, and I'd never except it.
Riddle of cement’s structure is finally solved
Actually, yes. Given my computer is always on display on a desk or table in my home, I consider it to be a piece of furniture. Therefore aesthetics are as much a consideration as they are for anything else I buy for for my home.
So what's the solution then? Are corporations are supposed to hire an "average" person to write an employment contract for them, so that the playing field is level? Or is the employee supposed to hire a lawyer to inform them, which is something they can already do? Does the mom-and-pop down the street that hires teenagers with a contract from LegalZoom qualify? At what level of sophistication is this line drawn?

The only real position I see here is something like arethuza discussed [0] where the employer reimburses the employee for legal fees related to reviewing and negotiating the contract. Though questions of "when does this apply" are still unsolved.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11059309
This lack of repairability is actually not a recent thing at all. For example, I worked a support job in the late 90s where a high proportion of Applecare complaints were resolved with "replace the motherboard." With PCs we just replaced the offending part, which was rarely the motherboard.

The worst part of this is that Apple's success has dragged the rest of the market toward things like non-replaceable batteries.
Haskell's interface isn't intentionally unintelligible. In fact, it's not unintelligible at all (don't confuse playful exploratory code with standard code, just like you wouldn't think obfuscated C is standard). It's just that you're unfamiliar with it. Most ideas behind Haskell are quite logical and systematic.
I'm having trouble relating this comment to the referenced paper [1], which seems to be explicit that its impossiblity result does not apply when synchronised clocks are available.

For example, on page 375: “Crucial to our proof is that processing is completely asynchronous; that is, we make no assumptions about the relative speeds of processes or about the delay time in delivering a message. We also assume that processes do not have access to synchronized clocks, so algorithms based on time-outs, for example, cannot be used.”

1. http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall07/cos518/pa...
All of the research from the timeframe of atmospheric atomic testing, is no doubt classified.

There is plenty of evidence suggesting that exposure to low levels of radiation for extended periods increases cancer probabilities.
> Usually, in any other area, an interface made intentionally to be unintelligible to the general public as well as a professional target audience would be derided as bad design.

Evidence that Haskell was deliberately made difficult to understand? And supposing this were true, why hasn't anyone made the interface more intelligible?

> If Haskell's interface is hard to understand, that is a problem with Haskell.

That's a bit like saying that if the mathematics used in the General Theory of Relativity is hard to understand, it is a problem with the General Theory of Relativity.
Apple will begin sitting on it's laurels while core services and products degrade, while Microsoft enters a quiet, user-first renaissance under new leadership.

(buzzer sound)
Not for a tool contributing towards six figures of income for me annually. That's an insane ROI.

EDIT: I know people who spend more than that on Starbucks each month.
> who incompetent advise her

That was very competent advice from the point of the company -- the HR person convinced her to sign the provision the company wanted her to sign, the company didn't have to face a choice between agreeing to strike the non-compete or letting her walk, and there was no record of the misleading "sales pitch" the HR representative used (which might have served as evidence of conflicting intentions, allowing a court to strike the non-compete provision on the grounds that the parties didn't intend it to be binding, or even caused future liability for the company if the HR rep's description of the non-compete crossed the line between legal sales techniques "oh that's not important, you don't want to think too hard about this part of the thing, everybody signs it" and illegal fraudulent misrepresentation "it says X" when it clearly it actually says Y which is totally different).

It sounds like the HR person did their job competently.
I've got a strong interest on overlay networking solutions like Weave, but I'm not an expert on Docker and other container solutions.

What's the new thing here? If I understood correctly, it seems that you can connect your Docker host to an overlay network, so your containers can access other containers and resources through it. Am I correct to think this facilitates orchestration of the containers' network?

Disclosure: I am behind https://wormhole.network which could be seen as some sort of Weave competitor, but it's not. It covers other use cases, even though there's some overlapping e.g. overlay multi-host networking for containers https://github.com/pjperez/docker-wormhole - it doesn't require changes on the host itself, but can't be orchestrated.
Try it with modernist cuisine's official pdf-s. That is the test i use when I really want to make a pdf reader suffer.
People are entitled to do that.

Just like people buy cars/homes/clothes/cellphones just because of how they look.

I'd argue they should look at the overall "package" when purchasing, but if looks are important to someone that's absolutely fine, and there is nothing wrong with valuing looks.
Interesting. My college track coach expressed it as social, grades and running: pick 2. Sleep is a requirement or all the rest inevitably fall apart.

Personally I think fitness is not as time consuming as many people make out. I run 5 to 6 hours a week total clocking 40 to 50 miles. Granted running is probably one of the more time efficient forms of training... It's all about minimizing friction for me: run from home or work instead of driving somewhere and choosing my running time to minimize time spent in traffic. It helps a lot that my spouse is also a runner and many of my friends are so that takes care of much if the family/social part...

So 6 hours out of my 112 waking hours does not seem impossible. And most people could cut that in half and stay in decent shape.
It would be nice if there was better Linux support from Apple. I haven't tried it, but from reading guides it seems like installing Linux on a Macbook comes with a whole set of gotchas and workarounds.
Recent Macs have a wifi chip that requires WME/WMM extensions (Wireless Multimedia) in most cases. For most APs it will have issues if these are switched off. Rumor is it's a chipset thing not a software thing.
Your Go-to-Manufacturing Checklist
Apple has always had problems with software quality. In the past, Jobs was around to not only provide a reality distortion field to distract people from that fact but also to drag the company forward on specific projects and products (such as OS X) which kept the balance of quality to crap high enough. He also kept the company away from making big design or UX mistakes. Since Jobs has been gone Apples has been making missteps at an increasing rate, consider, for example, this set of gems: https://twitter.com/jonyiveparody/status/674749292494491648

Apple's edge has always been that it was well plugged into the aesthetic sensibilities of its market, which is an unusual combination of skills to be tied to reasonably high quality engineering (the same dynamic that existed between Jobs and Woz since the first, really). It's somewhat inevitable that it would go away eventually, it's more sad that nobody cracked the formula so that more companies could have the same level of success. Clunky design is still the norm almost everywhere, and that's only slowly changing.
I remember Steve Jobs saying that Apple is a software company, and then quoting Alan Kay: "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware.". Apple certainly has the talent in-house to be a software company (llvm, webkit, cups, swift, metal, etc., even if they didn't start the first three) but somehow it doesn't seem to reach the higher level apps (iTunes, Podcast, etc.).

I suspect poor product management: I strongly doubt llvm or swift are driven like iTunes.
Linux Desktop Survey Project – Feb/2016
As much as I liked Mac OS X, I recently jumped ship from my early 2015 retina macbook pro to a dell xps 13 and i am super happy. Windows 10 is definitely not the same but it is much much better than how windows 8 used to be. The biggest factor that got me to switch was how locked down the hardware was and i couldnt even replace the battery if i wanted to. And i got the 128gig version thinking there would be aftermarket storage upgrade option down the line but it doesnt seem like that is happening.
I've seen in these inside Cobo Hall during the North American International Auto Show as well.
I'm guessing that, if unplugged, they continue to run off battery power and send an alert to the nearest homeland office.
> Kahneman and Granger are recent Nobel Prize winners that didn't have a PhD in economics.

I don't know about that--it was really a chore to christen the field of behavioral economics, previously considered to be "psychology".
> extra annoying part is that Apple's total lack of reputability is starting to spread to competing products

Oh, please. Apple has nothing to do with that problem. The problem is we're a throw away society hell bent on buying the latest greatest thing. If it's anyone's fault, it's our own.
I have iOS 9.2 and updated Music to the latest version. There is no "view all songs". But perhaps you found some way? Like I just want to see all songs, not playlists, not genres, everything. I'd love to find out :)
In general, self-taught Web Developers tend to lack some of the computer science theory. This may show up when you work on a large project and you need to sort and ingest a million records at a time. There can also be a tendency to be attracted to the newest trends out there when a more conservative approach might pay better dividends.
Yep same issue with 2013 MBA. The 4GB RAM is becoming a bottleneck but it's soldered in so I'll be forced to upgrade within a year.
Binding of Isaac: Rebirth Rejected by Apple
This is one of the least surprising "negative" outcomes of legal marijuana in selective states. I put negative in quotes just as a signal that it's not exactly optimal, but there's an argument that by moving their growth operations somewhere legal, it reduces the likelihood of violence in that particular aspect of the black market marijuana industry.
You got me imagining Steve Jobs doing a proper 2nd coming of the Christ now that he is somewhere higher. Classic Steve.
Or, you know, maybe a form of radiation creating initially confusing side effects within a commercial product.
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes, looking to relocate!

Technologies: new product development, CAD, Solidworks, Creo, ProE, injection molding, hardware, consumer electronics, sheet metal, steel, aluminum

Resume/CV: http://mcoyledesign.com/resume.html

Portfolio: http://mcoyledesign.com/

Email: mike@mcoyledesign.com

Lead design engineer on the CLUG bike rack, among others: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/834664305/clug-cycle-st...
> My take on this is not that Apple has gotten worse, but that they have actually gotten better at cloud services.

Which isn't saying much, since they're still terrible. Their cloud-synced Notes.app is almost unusable; every time I add a note on the phone there's maybe a one-in-three chance it'll sync to the desktop immediately, a one-in-three chance it'll sync the next day, and a one-in-three chance it'll appear three days later or more. If Apple has in fact gotten better at cloud services, it's only because they were so abysmal before that there was nowhere to go but up.
> but tomorrow the poor will still have no Internet access

That would still be the case if the verdict was the other way around. There's no evidence that Free Basics actually brought a significant number of new people on the internet (the rate of people cited as joining Free Basics is comparable to the rate of people joining the internet in general, so it didn't change anything)

Note that data plans are pretty cheap in India. The cost of a smartphone that can handle modern websites (especially Facebook, which breaks on old/slow phones and browsers) is more than the cost of a few year's worth of data.
Non-user-serviceability buys smaller and lighter form factors. I would expect the story to be similar for hardware with similar size, weight, and battery life characteristics.

EDIT: and most importantly, more battery chemistry per weight. Safety requires that serviceable batteries are enclosed in rather substantial cases whose internals are non-user-serviceable. Apple "cheats" by making this case the entire laptop, rather than a specific battery module.
Their software was never great to begin with. But there was a form of uniqueness, some innovation. That much is gone now. Despite the fact that they're developing for their own hardware, despite the hundreds of billions, their software is neither especially fast nor particularly reliable.
> That's a bit like saying that if the mathematics used in the General Theory of Relativity is hard to understand, it is a problem with the General Theory of Relativity.

Well, but that's true; if there were easier-to-understand mathematics that had equal utility, it would be superior. The math being hard to understand is a problem, but (as far as anyone can tell), its a necessary cost with General Relativity.

So, for Haskell -- granting, for the sake of argument, that it is particularly hard to understand (which I'm not sure is really the case) -- the question is the complexity a necessary price for some benefit that is worth the cost?
S,K,B,C and Y are some famous operators that should be familiar to lambda-calculus nerds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKI_combinator_calculus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-point_combinator

The Y combinator (which is behind the name for this website) lets you define recursive functions without actually using recursion (the only recursive definition is Y itself, which is often available as a language primitive)

A less obfuscated version of the factorial using the y combinator would be this one:

fac' f n = if n == 0 then 1 else f (n - 1)
fac = y fac'

note how fac' is not recursive and instead calls its "f" parameter when it wants to do a recursive call. The y combinator then ties everything together by passing fac' to itself.

The other obfuscating factor in that program are the S,K,B and C combinators. The purpose of these one is to let you write a program without any variable definitions or lambdas. Notice that when that program finally defines `fact`, it has the form

fact = y {some big expression}

where the big expression only has function applications and references to the previously-defined combinators. There are no mentions to the "f" and "n" variables that we had before. The neat thing about the SK family of combinators is that you can use them to build any function, not just the factorial:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatory_logic#Completeness...

As for the speed comment, one way to implement lazy evaluation, as found in Haskell, is to compile programs down to those SK combinators and then use graph reduction to evaluate the result. I would expect a reasonable Haskell implementation to be able to automatically generate the unreadable combinator version of the program from the usual definition of factorial that we all know and love but maybe there was a Haskell implementation back in 2001 that wasn't as reasonable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_reduction

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Graph_reduction

https://wiki.haskell.org/Super_combinator

That said, dunno how the more recent Haskell compiler handle things. Hopefully some other helpful HN-er can enlighten us here.
I just think that for some programs or interfaces, like YouTube, it is fine for a while. Works great.

But then they hire a new UX person, or the incumbent UX person gets bored - so they keep refactoring the interface to put out an image of "getting work done" or "adding features and enhancements".

Basically making work for themselves and refactoring an already fine interface that user's are familiar with and just introducing new headaches to users along the way.
> Let's be real, Apple's never been a software company -- they've always made excellent hardware and good enough software that people will deal with because they want their amazing hardware.

Wrong.

This may be less true recently, but for a good decade Apple had the superior OS and were the only ones who got device and media integration right - that's all software.
Could you elaborate more or point to some sample code?
Yes, but they love the Microsoft apps on Mac and iPhone.

Strange times are these in which we live.
It's practically downvote bait in here to talk about how happy, overall, I've been with my move to the Surface product line or how much more I like the current incarnation of Win10 and the devkit than any of the other options.

But yeah, I never thought I'd say I was happier using the Microsoft variant but here I am.

And that's with 2 OS revs full of crashes, poor power management, and a replaced device because rev0 literally tore its hinge apart. I still enjoy the thing more than opening up my "work" laptop and struggling with OSX's halfhearted core apps and awkward expression of UNIX and just... the least amount of system stability surrounding virtualization I've had with any of the OSs I've tried.
I think for all meaningful solutions discussion and "talk" is critical. What would happen if India did not take offence to the free basics program as is ? It is crystal clear that FB was trying to muscle its power around as this meant a large demographics for them.

Its a win for India. Win for the free market.
I enjoy a good internet discussion!

So the topic of debate is whether its fair to charge a retail price for solar buybacks, or a wholesale price. I argued that a retail price is unfair, because energy utilities have a bunch of retail costs, of which billing is one of. The counter argument is that billing is a minute component of the retail cost. You've suggested that I have an informed opinion, but need sources to back up my argument.

Contact Energy have a management paper that discusses energy costs. A definition of Netback from Contact Energy (2015) is:

Netback is calculated by deducting the network, meter, levy and cost to serve costs from customer tariffs. This enables the performance of the retail channels to be measured without using an energy cost. The netback is meant to cover, inter alia, the cost of energy, capital return, risk margin and a retail margin.

Cost of Energy was $994M, while Cost of Transmission and Metering was $621M, and Cost to Serve (such as billing) was $118M for Contact Energy for the year ending 30 June 2015 (Contact Energy, 2015). The remainder, as EBITDAF was $484M.

As you can see, $118M for Cost to Serve is 11.8% of the Cost of Energy. This doesn't change with solar buybacks. The cost of energy is from a different source (your personal solar panels), but there's still costs of transmission and metering, cost to serve, and depending on the utility you connect to, some sort of EBITDAF (unless they're a not for profit). So that's $0 (your solar panels) + $621M (transmission/metering) + $118M (retail/billing) + $484M (earnings before income, tax, depreciation, amortisation, and changes in fair value of financial instruments).

Do check out McNicol (2013) for an interesting article on this.

tl;dr - Electricity networks are expensive, and the cost of energy is about half the total costs of running the system. Who pays for that, if the utility has to pay the retail rate to you because you're using solar panels?

References:
Contact Energy. (2015). Management discussion of financial results for the year ended 30 June 2015. Retrieved 9 February 2016 from https://www.contact.co.nz/cenergymedia/contactenergy/files/p...

McNicol, H. (2013). Are solar energy systems worth the cost? Retrieved 9 February 2016 from http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/the-rebuild/932970...
They're not done squeezing money out of you yet.
The Wi-Fi in the White House is just as bad as yours
Actually, it makes me realize how little money it is. I pay about that much for home internet access, and about that much for a cell phone plan.

It turns out I spend far more on internet access than I do on hardware, and I wouldn't have thought that to be the case.
Also:

"From 1951 to 1957, the United States military and the Atomic Energy Commission collaborated in a series of human radiation experiments called the Desert Rock exercises."

It seems they ordered soldiers to observe the explosion and then march through the site.

http://www.strangerdimensions.com/2012/07/09/the-united-stat...

The voice of the announcer in the video after the detonation: "these experiments are designed to dispel much of fear and uncertainty surrounding atomic radiation" "only 10% of injuries are due to the gamma rays"

The report of one of the soldiers:

http://www.angelfire.com/tx/atomicveteran/my-story.html

"When getting a reading almost anywhere near Ground Zero the Geiger needle just lay over on the maximum, so we started not to pay much attention to whatever the reading was on those Geiger Counters."
Yes.

I would assume that is why Twitter is integrating it into their Fabric platform. That's just a guess though.