skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Defenders of occupational licensing typically argue that the rules help protect consumers and workers, and that’s undoubtedly true in some cases. I want the people filling my cavities to know what they’re doing. But it’s hard not to suspect that in many cases, these rules serve another purpose: to make it harder for new competitors to enter the marketplace. In Nevada, according to Politico, barbers need more than two years of training to qualify for a license; that’s a high bar to anyone looking to break into the business.

So, it's the all powerful Nevada barber cartel that influences legislation in order to keep new people from entering the trade?

Well, I, for one, seriously doubt that.

And I wouldn't call the requirement to have "two years of training" before taking razors to people's necks and scissors to people's hair "a high bar" either.

While there is indeed TONS of rent-seeking going on, I'd look for it in serious industries, with big companies and multinationals involved -- from telcos and ISPs to construction and the health industry for example.
One point that doesn't seem to have been brought up is that Asian cultures are "high context" while Western ones are "low context"; see this article for a detailed explanation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-_and_low-context_cultures

A rough summarisation could be that Asians are quite information-hungry, whereas Westerners are more information-averse.
It's a platform, not a broker. At the moment it's totally free, and supports Interactive Brokers and Robinhood as backends (both very low commission).

It only supports equities at the moment, with futures on the way. It only trades the US markets at the moment, exchange rates aren't relevant and dividends depends on how you want them "accounted for".
New version of xonsh released (0.2.6)
Kids Who Have Died Playing High School Football This Year
Then how do you exploit it without assuming the ability to execute arbitrary code as the user?
Yes you can. The MIT and BSD licenses explicitly allow sublicensing. That's part of their whole schtick and why free software people don't particularly like them (you can sublicense them to be proprietary).
Should that be up to Walmart?
I'm glad somebody else enjoyed Sneakers.
No, help them deal with culture shock. Which if you've never experienced is probably not something you can imagine.
> A free market is only constrained by the morality of individuals

It really isn't even very constrained by that. It helps if people are generally virtuous, but even an institution where the majority of the people are of good moral character, can display pathological behavior if it's poorly designed.
In theory yes, in practice you couldn't even hope to get all of the copyright holders' permission. You'd have to surgically remove the code of everyone who didn't consent to the relicensing (good luck) and everybody would hate you for it.
I think it varies by cultural extraction and emotional background. My life experience suggests that people from "warm" and "romantic" cultures are more likely to experience the highs of falling in love than people from more measured, rationalistic and phlegmatic cultures.

Being from a "warm and romantic" background myself, I can confirm that falling in love is very much intoxicating. It alters one's frame of mind and leads to decisions one simply would not make for any other reason. Some of them are quite momentous and have lasting impact indeed.
What does 'loss' mean on your graphs? Error fraction?
It's kind of funny how people want guarantees about the licenses of future releases that don't actually exist.

There's no guarantee that a random open source project will have any new releases at all. In that case, what good is a promise about its license?

Or if they do happen, the code might change in a way that's backward-incompatible so you can no longer use it.

The only guarantee you can count on is that if the code you actually have doesn't suit your needs, you can change it yourself.
>While the article seems to criticize rent-seeking behavior only in businesses and professions that require lower levels of education, if we combine this article's statements with the often repeated claim that the US pays roughly twice as much for health care per capita as other developed countries it seems reasonable to ask: Is there a rent seeking problem in the medical and dental fields too?

Western countries with same or even stricter bars to become a doctor/dentist etc manage to have 1/3 to 1/10 the prices the US has.

So I don't think it's "rent seeking" that's responsible for this. I'd put the blame more on insurance companies and the bizarro US ideas about employment insurance and healthcare.

Nor I think "occupational licensing" for e.g. cabs which can be considered rent-seeking is the same as requiring higher levels of education from doctors, lawyers and such things.
> first recall the precise pronunciation of the word (the -n vs -ng for example)

I am a foreigner living in China and this was never an issue for me, so I doubt the native people here find that a problem.

I rarely see any Chinese people use the handwriting character recognition on their phones. I use it sometimes just for practice, but just writing pinyin is much faster.
I agree that the names are confusing or misleading to modern readers. The strange choice of words in both cases seems to be due to the terms being used in a technical sense with a more specific meaning than in plain English. Plus, they are both based on terms coined long ago, and the connotations (or definitions) of English words do tend to change over the centuries.

From the Wikipedia page on moral hazard:

> [...] the term dates back to the 17th century [...] Dembe and Boden point out, however, that prominent mathematicians studying decision making in the 18th century used "moral" to mean "subjective", which may cloud the true ethical significance in the term.

From the Wikipedia page on rent seeking:

> The word "rent" does not refer here to payment on a lease but stems instead from Adam Smith's division of incomes into profit, wage, and rent. The origin of the term refers to gaining control of land or other natural resources.
Many principles in visual design are not followed very well in China. There is little room for those possibilities derived from the principles to be discussed here. So so-called culture or related things are not excuses for them.

One force that drives the differences between western way and current Chinese way is the degree of diversity in the internet business world. In China, one-stop-shop is the mainstream mind among participants. App style is not the leading force there. This is only a hint.

Sorry to just mention some unclear points. I'm quite busy on other things atm. Just my 2 cents.

[edit]: my terrible grammar
The problem is never the migrants or refugees. The problem is their luggage and the reaction of the hosts.
Exposing shared public keys creates an information leak; it allows attackers to probe for valid and usable username/key combinations on your servers (and thereby discover valid usernames). This may be a trivial information leak or it may be one that you consider important; it depends on the situation.

Not sharing public keys between different services and contexts (eg not using your Github keys for anything else) mitigates this risk significantly.
Most of us (meaning people that aren't European) would be willing to move anywhere in the EU, at least for a while. I lived and worked in France for some time. My family came from Germany and Switzerland 150 years ago, and my wife's great grandmother came from Spain only 100 years ago (she's Mexican and now also American). It's a really neat thing to be over there and feel that connection to an ancestral homeland that we still have family stories about.

Close to where I grew up was a town called Swedesburg, they fly the Swedish flag there to this day. Lots of Germans and Swedes. One would think Europe would change immigration law to encourage people who would naturally have some affinity or ties to the region. But that doesn't seem to be a popular idea. I think my wife and I would be able to integrate anywhere over there, northern or southern Europe, with zeal. We both speak English, Spanish, we can already communicate with Italians as a result of Spanish, and are enthusiastic about cultures and languages. I've lived in the US, France, Mexico and visited ~10 nations including Russia. My wife has visited equally as many and studied in Valencia. I've been to Finland- it has less snow than the part of the US I'm from (though my wife would probably not be thrilled).

I've always gotten the feeling Europe prefers its former African and mideast colonies to immigrate north, rather than American hordes with their money and talents (which may be more offputting to the natives than a more desperate immigrant).
They're doing a bit of quantum computing research and patenting stuff left and right and it's making everyone in the field uncomfortable.
Real love is actually pretty good for you altogether, body and mind, emotionally and psychologically. But that's not what most people think of as "love".
I can confirm. My girlfriends father needed a new phone and he needed a phone with character recognition.

I dont recall seeing any of my friends or colleagues here using this feature.
Only in certain circles. The same circles that equate Muslim with Undesirable.
This was a great read and made me less fearful of my own impending Open Source attempt.
It's definitely useful, but if we can do that and also be interesting, wouldn't that be better?

If this was a marketing course and the assignment was to sell people on the idea of learning to program, "Hello World" introductions would get a failing grade.

What's distinct about Hello World is that it's a ritualized version of learning how to write a print statement. Teachers sell it as an important rite of passage, but that just isn't how students feel about it (and they shouldn't). I think this disconnect only causes students to disengage.
> Few academics and laymen regard romantic love as an addiction

I think dozens on pop songs say otherwise.

Jazz: "Like someone in love" "you go to my head"
Pop: Kelly Clarkson's "Addicted", Kanye's "Addiction", Kesha "You're love is my drug" (and those are just the "K" artists!)...
> Exposing shared public keys creates an information leak; it allows attackers to probe for valid and usable username/key combinations on your servers (and thereby discover valid usernames).

How? That's now how public key auth works...

> Not sharing public keys between different services and contexts (eg not using your Github keys for anything else) mitigates this risk significantly.

This is true for other reasons, and you can automate it with some shell scripts.
I grew up in the care of parents that decided to stay together for the children.

I can't really complain--they both love me--I grew up in a safe middle class environment, one of them always read with me at night when I was young, I never worried about being hungry, got toys on x-mas, etc. They certainly never abused me.

But to this day I struggle with relationships. I have a hard time connecting with people, even in a non-romantic context.

Man, I realize I don't know anyone who's going to read this, but it feels real good to confess it to someone.

EDIT: To be honest, I feel like such an asshole. There are people that have had it way worse than me, and here I am feeling sorry for myself.
Yeah, we struggled with how to do errors right in Rust for a long time, and it's really interesting to see that we almost ended up in the same place as Midori. The main differences are:

- Midori (and Swift) uses effects instead of monadic types (probably good, since we dodge the interactions with generics described at the end, but the "throws" syntax is so sweet);

- Rust uses a return codes implementation instead of an unwinding implementation (for simplicity's sake; some Rust users really don't like unwinding, for legitimate reasons in many cases, but Midori's arguments in favor of unwinding are compelling);

- Rust lets you catch panics at thread boundaries (one of the most controversial decisions in Rust; I think it was the right one, but I definitely acknowledge that it's a big tradeoff).
It happens often that really unknown projects come up with really good names, never go anywhere, and just continue to use up that name. It's kind of like domain name squatting, and it's a shame. Swift and Go! both existed prior to Swift and Go. I'm fine with Swift and Go. And Midori. (Who ever heard of Midori?)
So much. Treats tech pretty accurately, too, for the most part. Teaches some good security lessons as well, about social engineering and infiltration.
> "Yeah, I know this obscure name is already used for an open source project and I just don't care"

Curious how you jump to this conclusion. Not to burst your bubble, but the overwhelming majority of programmers even have likely never heard of the Midori browser. Additionally, the Midori browser did not invent this word, it is a Japanese word...and also the name of a band, the name of an olympic figure skater, the name of a liquor, all predating the browser.

Why on earth would people working on an internal Microsoft project go searching for obscure open source projects that might be using the same name before agreeing to move forward with the name?
"nfr" gives me "南方人"
GitHub exposes everyone's email address in GIT commits
LIGO project:scientists going for direct evidence of gravitational waves
>They've suffered war, laws that declare gender-inequality ( soft words for what those laws actually are, but anyway ), homo-phobic state-politics, etc.

About war yes, but lots of those people have not "suffered" gender-inequality or homo-phobic state-politics -- In fact those things might be part of what the believe and support themselves.

Those things are part of their culture -- and grassroots -- not stuff that some bad regime imposed upon the masses. The same way they are not "imposed" upon the people in the Bible Belt.

And lest we feel much superior, those kind of laws and public sentiment was common place in the far more wealthy and educated West too. Just 50 years ago there was open, legal even, segregation. Just today there's widespread support for police brutality. And just 75 years ago several million jews/homosexuals/communists and gypsies were obliterated in the center of "civilized Europe".

And if you think those times are "ancient history" and can't understand why everyone hasn't moved forward since then, just remember stuff that's still acceptable (or going on anyway) in some places, from the death penalty and racially motivated police shootings, to mass surveillance. Or consider the fact that "sodomy" stopped being a crime only 10-15 years ago in tons of places. And that "moving forward" is easier when you're not in a state of war or even fearful of those preaching "moving forward".
CSS offers plenty of ways to hang yourself without resorting to SASS. The people who are dangerous with SASS tend to already be just as dangerous with plain CSS, in my experience.

The additional options for self harm are well offset by the features.
> islamification of Europe

Your choice of words makes your agenda very clear
Don't feel like an asshole. Life is complicated and turbulent - everyone's. It's easy to forget that when watching TV or browsing Facebook, which beam only idealised portraits and high notes into our minds--the conscious and unconscious parts. It's easy to think everyone has their shit together and you're the only fuckup, but you couldn't be more wrong.

In reality, a lot more parents stayed together for the kids than you realise. Decades of marriage aren't easy to sustain for anyone, no matter what their personalities or notional compatibility. Many more people struggled and struggle with depression, alcoholism or substance abuse than meets the eye. There's a veneer of comme il faut civilisation over it all, but it's very thin.

Actually-existing reality is messy. The world is messy. Don't forget that you only see the curated--in some cases scrupulously curated--presentation layer of almost everyone else's life.

It's almost like going to a Quixtar-Amway IBO motivational conference/Sieg Heil cult rally, or any trade show consisting primarily of account reps, crazed MBA apes and sales bullshitters; it'll seem like everyone's a successful millionaire except you, because that's the whole point of the venture. Nobody would pay expensive registration fees to attend a grim, morose and sober appraisal of the ups and downs of the casino that is their life. In reality, 89% of them are broke.
This is what I have. I just have a cheap Ikea Jerker desk. It has worked great for me for a long time. I can stand sometime, use my chair other times. I good tall-chair was the trickiest part for me to find.
Yes, but it's also part of a trend -- like it's the cause-of-the-day and everybody tried to show nice they were because of it (not totally unlike Hollywood celebrities suddenly championing some cause or another in the third world, when in fact they don't care that much).

Which is not bad in itself, but can be dangerous when there's no substance to that, and their hosts become bored with that "cause" and forget about them or turn hostile.
Ask HN: Do you loose out on money by working at large, private tech. companies?
Hello, I've been working as a systems/security engineer in the NYC area for 8 years. This has been at a mixture of mid-sized & large, privately held, technology organizations. Recently, I started thinking of making a move and have been trying to gather some information about average salaries using various resources (HN, Glassdoor, Quora, H1B databases).

I knew that at organizations like GOOG/MSFT, the compensation comprises of a base salary + bonus + stock that usually vests over 4 years with a 1-year cliff and is refreshed every year. From what I've experienced, large, privately held organizations only offer a base salary + a bonus.

Based on the information that I've found, barring outliers, the base salaries for people with my experience at profitable public & private organizations seem to be in the 150-200K range and the bonuses in the 10-20% range (the exception to this are the privately held hedge/quant funds with bonuses in the 50-150% range).

The above didn't come as a surprise but the amount of stock that employees seem to receive at public companies shocked me. 70-80K seemed normal and >100K wasn't unheard of. And, at senior roles, one's base salary doesn't seem to sky rocket but the stock does (Someone told me that senior staff engineers @ Google could have a base salary of 220K and stocks > 200K).

Unfortunately, I haven't interviewed in a very long time so it's hard for me to verify these numbers. I was wondering if people who have more insight into this could shed some light on the accuracy of these figures? If these are true, then it seems like a really unwise decision (at least from a financial perspective) to opt to work at privately held organizations unless it is a Renaissance/Bridgewater. I feel that beyond a certain threshold, hopping jobs for raises & fighting for a small increase in your bonus may not necessarily be worth the effort but these stock numbers over a few years could end up influencing major life decisions.

Thank you.
It's always been controversial whether a company should be allowed to invest in new fields. Over the last 100 years a few people have even made the argument that it is illegal for a company to invest in a new fields. There were some lawsuits about this in the 20th Century, though the courts always sided with the corporations.

Still, the argument is interesting to consider. Suppose it is 1995 and Microsoft it at the peak of its power, so you invest in Microsoft stock. Then 14 years go by. Now it is 2009. Google is rising in power. You want to get your money out of Microsoft, so you can invest it in Google. Does Microsoft have a legal obligation to give you all that it can? Or can Microsoft create Bing? Microsoft then creates Bing and loses more than $1 billion on it. You feel frustrated. Microsoft could have given that money to its shareholders, so you would have more money to invest in Google. But instead the money was wasted on Bing.

On the more general level, the question is, when one industry is in decline, and another industry is rising, who is responsible for shifting capital from the dying industry to the growing industry? Should individual investors do it, or should corporations do it?

You could argue that IBM is following the philosophy that all money should be given to the shareholders, so that the shareholders can reinvest the money wherever they feel best.
Having grown up in the Rust Belt, I think the answer is that there's a talent drain. Smart, ambitious kids with prospects tend to leave -- it's not something that just affects CEO's and the 1%, it's something that affects the lower-upper and upper-middle classes as well.
They got as far as porting the Microsoft Speech Server, for multiple languages, yet the project was canceled. That's really sad.
So? I don't like the spread of religious insanity?

You're polarizing the world. It's extremism. There should be a warning for normal people that HN has radical leftists in seats of authority.

You're no better than someone who bans gays from forums. You're no less extreme.

Gross, dude. It's a really disgusting planet that you're forcing on everyone.
In offices / places where I don't have a standing desk I put a non office chair on the desk and work on that. For me it still works a lot better than sitting.

It is one of the reasons I'm looking to work while walking in nature. It works for 50% of my work load currently (meetings and project discussions / management tasks) but for coding I still need a computer. I am getting there though; my ideas for mobile coding, mobile internet and voice recog are getting better and faster. The biggest challenge is how to make overviews; there is no way to browse through code easily on a small screen so I make overviews in different ways and that part I have not managed to tackle comfortably at all.
I think Silverstein makes a weak argument, and I agree with Weinberg in that I see nothing wrong with noticing when someone's view turned out to be in agreement with what is now established science, or has by now been clearly refuted. I would, however, argue that doing so is not particularly important - even when we can do it, knowing who was wrong and who was right (and no-one was right all the time and in every detail) doesn't tell us anything about how we got to being able to make that judgment with confidence.
I was in a crazy addicted love relationship once in my life in 2007 and it scared us both because of it's irrational power and what the article terms "intrusive thinking." We met on StumbleUpon and were attracted by our shared sensibilities at first, later much more than that after we met. About that time, when it was getting crazy, we both read the story of game designer Theresa Duncan[1] and artist Jeremy Blake[2], two lovers who committed suicide within a week of one another. She and I broke it off after that. It seemed like the smart thing to do. I would have scoffed at this article if I had not had a very real experience of what the article is describing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresa_Duncan
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Blake