skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Benjamin Franklin's world is so utterly different from ours because of where they were on the technology curve then, he may as well be talking about a different universe.

Maybe if you live in a suburb in the Netherlands and are part of a privileged socioeconomic class, these risks are low to non-existent. How about the billion plus people who don't even have electricity today? How about those who have nothing to give to the global economy because they're unemployable, cast aside, and lack technology, do they not live in risky environments and engage in risky behaviors as a matter of course through no fault of their own? Are there not entire countries of people getting pwned in every sense of the word by more powerful entities, right now, as we speak? Used up and then left to perish? No matter what the statistics, these poor victims are somebody. They're real people. "Oh, but that crime is so rare (for someone like me)"

What about slave trade? Our "low crime" existence in first world countries isn't made possible by rampant crime and resource domination on the other side of borders? From where I'm standing, it looks to me like a lot of assholes are not only getting away with murder and ecological destruction, they're getting rich off of it, despite any and all laws to the contrary.

How does making law less enforceable by embracing shadows (lack of transparency) in our age of accelerating technological change make life better for the majority (all living things)? Unfortunately the American Bill of Rights doesn't mean shit unless it applies to everyone. American business and government as a matter of course commit atrocities that are against it and nothing happens merely because those atrocities aren't (directly / provably) against Americans.

As a response to all the other children posts of this thread, I'm not saying let's maintain the status quo, plus perfect enforcement of the law. I'm saying we're entering a new age and shit needs to get revamped badly. Transparency in all things public would be a big step towards ridding our world of many evils that happen right now because powerful actors always have and will continue to act in the shadows while humanity, as a group, agrees to put up with it, er because e.g. preteens are sexting each other and as a result, the current utterly draconian and provably corrupt & massively inefficient law system has destroyed their first world lives. That really, really sucks. You know what sucks even worse? Being born or sold into sex slavery.

Simplify the law, make a universal bill of rights for all living things. Make it global. Automate and enforce it. For everyone. Obsolete the time when you could kill disenfranchised people and get away with it 'because high-priced lawyers'. It's hard for me to see how that could possibly be worse than what we have today, where the few get a nice life and all the rest are grist for the mill, to be used up.
This just underscores that people are complex, fallible, and inconsistent and that we rarely have the full story.

With people like this, I'd just really like to get them alone in a room, off the record, and probe their beliefs, motivations, why they did things, etc.

I wonder what it was like to work with Comey at Bridgewater Associates.
If you pressure people to agree to something, it's your own damn fault if they change their mind.

Give people time to consider their options, and they 'll be less likely to change their mind.
>I think the peace of mind that you and everyone you'll ever know will never get disappeared into someone's rape dungeon doesn't seem so bad. Or that you can go into business and actually win because you're doing it better, because your competitors aren't in bed with government, corruptly and systematically destroying the possibility of competition.

A society in which law enforcement will be perfect (from a technical perspective) is not the same as a society in which the law is perfect.

Nor is a police having "100% capability of catching thieves, etc" the same as a police catching "100% of thieves".

The police could have all the tools on their disposal to catch anyone, but the political leaders of the police, and those influencing policy, law and enforcement, will still be the same higher-ups with self interests.

And of course any bevelonce in the use of such powers is just a regime change away from being lost -- not to mention that such powers would make it more tempting for the elite get dictatorial powers, and more difficult for the people to get rid of them.

Among other things, to quote Anatole France: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread".

Without much turbulent political history to draw upon (compared to a place like Germany or Italy) Americans are quite naive on such matters, especially white ones (even though McCarthyism, or J.E Hoover, or Nixon are there as examples, along with many others, like the recent SWATization of police forces, ridiculous 3-strikes laws etc). Black Americans on the other hand, of who people between 60 - 80 still lived in legal segregation, and who still get show for "walking while black" among tons of similar injustices, know better.
The form ``email'' has been well established in England for several years, so I am amazed to see Americans being overly conservative in this regard. (Of course, ``email'' has been a familiar word in France, Germany, and the Netherlands much longer than in England --- but for an entirely different reason.)"

I sense there's a joke here. Did anyone get it?
> There are a multitude options for chat that provide a better experience

"Better", huh? One of those opinion words. They like it, you don't. Some people like IRC. It's a funny old world.

"keeping in contact was not a problem in the first place"

A bit simplistic, this. You could have said the same about email when it replaced snail-mail for most people, most of the time. But now email has been largely abandoned, thanks to spam and "better" alternatives which let you know when someone has received, then read, your message. Facebook messenger is amongst the most popular of these because they've listened to what people want, and responded.

> and all that's left are games or wanting to show off/snoop on lives.

I don't spend more than a few minutes a week on facebook itself (i only really got an account for messenger, because just about everyone is on facebook so it was easier than convincing them to get a google+ account, or installing 4 or 5 other apps) but I understand that the gaming thing is waning. Showing off - well, if you're talking about people talking about what they do, sharing holiday photos etc then I guess you could use that description, I suppose. Is there a way of sharing holiday photos in a way which you personally would not describe as showing off?

"I would argue it provides a largely negative value if you consider filter bubbles and their impact on society."

I think very carefully before installing apps or using web services so as to avoid anything that makes me part of the problem. Nah, just kidding. I've heard this sort of thing before. You're one of these people who believe that people all used to read the same newspapers and watch the same tv and got exposed to differing opinions, and now people can choose their sources they'll just choose stuff they already agree with, and facebook is part of that? I think you'd have to go back a long, long way for that to have ever been true, and even when it was there are endless studies to show that people reject/ignore stuff they don't agree with, and give sources they do agree with the benefit of the doubt. And in any event, it's not like many people are using facebook as their main news source. And even if they did, it sounds like you're above all that, so your use of facebook would have a positive impact on some of the sheeple on there, and can help to make the world a better place.

Or you could just use it, like I do, to keep in touch with your mates.
>Imagine a world in which theft, rape, slavery, and child abuse are impossible

If you think this is possible through any technical means, you're not reading the right science fiction. I suggest you give Watchbird by Robert Sheckley a read.[0] It will disabuse you of any notion that we can improve society through any system of "perfect enforcement."

[0] https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29579
I can't answer your question, because I don't know the answer.

However, I would recommend against relying on wereHamster's apparent mis-information... unless Google's policies are different in the jurisdiction that wereHamster is familiar with, in which case I apologize.
10 Strange Narcissistic Things People Do While Alone
Read an article last month that was somewhat seriously asking if Trump has ever used a computer: http://gizmodo.com/has-donald-trump-ever-used-a-computer-176...
Only time, I'd say. My best educated friends have Imposter syndrome the worst.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, I certainly hope so, you do realize you're citing a satirical source, "The Onion"?

There is a distinct difference between a business using a system to keep track of inventory and the enforcement of a digital only currency...
I recall an anecdote about a college professor who had students pull cards out of a bucket. What card you pulled out of a bucket determined your fate as a person born during the Middle Ages. Most of the cards were peasant or died at age n (where n < 25).

I used to joke with some of my fellow geeks (ok, I still do) that if we were born two or three hundred years earlier, we would have had a horrible life in the fields, farming.

Going back to why I replied, the sad fact about an information age economy is that working with information or your community (e.g. coding or using that information to trade) is leveraged and worth more than pure manual labor. At the highest level, you have CEOs with insane networks of personal relationships (I knew a family friend once who, with one phone call, got the best eye surgeon in the state to do an emergency operation on one of his friend's friends) and surgeons who can save lives. At the medium level, you have coders.

From a rational economics standpoint, everyone is expendable. But the replacement costs are quite high for those higher up the power-law curve of the information economy.
>Enter problem two. What happens when my project has heaps of controllers/services etc… I now have directories that could have a lot of files and none of them are particularly easy to find.

My team uses Angular 1.4.7 for a very large project (hundreds of JS files, dozens of views/controllers/services). We have in our JS folder a services folder, controllers, directives, etc. No subfolders except in our directives folder which has some directives which are only applicable to a specific area of the application. Services by convention are just the name of the topic at hand, no "service" suffix (i.e. alert.js, user.js). We have had no issues as far as file navigation goes. I grant that convenience to our development environment. We run a primarily .NET stack and leverage Visual Studio 2015 so the "CTRL + comma" keyboard shortcut makes it very easy to work with these relatively large folders. My main point being I think the development environment plays a very large role in whether structure A or structure B will be more optimal for your team. If a CLI were going to be our means of navigation, this structure would be much more challenging to work with and I don't have a good suggestion for that circumstance.
Some fan calculations suggest it could handle even more, but SpaceX knows more about their coefficients of friction and center of gravity than we do.
Tell me again which engines get corroded by sea water but not by combustion and re-entry
apparently Elon tweeted this, but it has since been deleted.
It's not a joke -- email (or émail in French) means enamel or glaze in those languages.
It is definitely worth asking "what is the approach to automated testing here?" in interviews.
While the ability to censor people has increased tremendously, our government's perverted interest in puritan idiocy seems unchanged for hundreds of years. I just can't believe that who someone decides to have sex with is still something the government insists on controlling. What a sick society we live in and then have the audacity to call everyday natural actions "vice". No, vice is that sheriff's sick obsession with other people's sexual activities and his insistence on controlling them for his own sick pleasure. Vice is indeed the public's willingness to accept and get pleasure based on other people's pain. It's just amazing how much Americans love hurting each other simply for the sake of suffering.
Yahoo mail suffers major outage in Europe
If you added an LVT on top of current taxation systems, probably. One way to make it more revenue-neutral would be to reduce some other tax, like sales taxes.

But now consider idle land that's being held speculatively. The landowner expected to sell it at a profit in the future, but now those profits are impacted by the LVT. To maintain their profits they would need to find tenants for the land in order to pay the LVT. (Or settle with less profit! :P)
This is one of our top problems we're working on.
Thank you. If that is indeed the case then I'm left asking the same question.
Insurance premiums are a function of losses. Automated trucks will reduce losses and reduce premium. It's not going to just reduce drivers, it's going to put a dent in the insurance industry. Companies like Geico could lose 40% of premium according to a KPMG report I can't link to because I'm on my cell.

This could also affect the amount of capital available to the economy as insurance companies invest their premiums.
For anyone who is unfamiliar with the "midnight" reference, I believe Jess may be talking about the Doomsday Clock on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:

http://thebulletin.org/timeline

(Jess, correct me if I'm mistaken.)

Unfortunately, the clock hands are currently set at 3 minutes to midnight, the closest we've been since 1953. The hands were much farther from midnight in the '60s and '70s.
>How does making law less enforceable by embracing shadows (lack of transparency) in our age of accelerating technological change make life better for the majority (all living things)?

The people you mention (the billions of global poor) get by, and live somewhat free, because of the law being less enforceable.

All of them break this or that law in order to make ends meet and survive. And those laws are compiled and passed by people who'd rather get rid of those poor altogether.

Again, to quote Anatole France: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread".

More enforceability of the law will mean more people at the mercy of the law -- and more people in jail, undeservingly so.

Not to mention that this whole discussion presumes "ethical laws" -- which is far from the truth in most of the world, include the BS us "three strikes laws" (which can put a man, usually a poor and/or black one, in jail for life for stealing a loaf of bread if they've done 2 equally BS offences in the past), marijuana laws, sodomy laws (until recently), etc.
I think there's something to that. The more you learn, the more you realize you don't know.

You also tend to be exposed to other well-educated people who are specialized in areas you are not.
'Greater good' is a dangerous idea in itself. Centralized management rarely realizes that the local maxima and global maxima often differ greatly.
Ah I see, why does Phoenix require Node 5?
In that case you could easily institute a progressive tax system whereby each additional property you own faces a higher tax rate, effectively preventing the wealthy elite from holding on to land indefinitely.

We already do this a little bit in some states of the US with homestead taxing
I really appreciate and mostly agree with your sentiment, but I still keep thinking to myself:

The Space Shuttle was reusable too.

With the Space Shuttle, we returned the primary motors to the ocean, but it was incredibly expensive to refurbish them (they were essentially scrapped and used as parts), and of course the shuttle itself was completely reused.

What SpaceX achieved here is a potentially better margin of costs for reuse, but even that hasn't been proven until we actually start reusing the rockets, seeing how their reliability trails off after each use, etc.

As great as I think this achievement is, it's not orders of magnitude better than the Space Shuttle. And it remains to be seen whether space travel will become truly accessible and cheap because of it.
The existence of this feature has no implications on the question of whether or not there's a backdoor in the client. The current implementation requires approval by the client. A hypothetical backdoor could be anywhere, and you wouldn't know about it unless you check the bytecode.
Use phusion base image as a guide for best practices around RUN steps and cleanup.
As the hiring party, how would you feel about a hypothetical deadline from the hiree on how long you have to evaluate them and present an offer? Would limiting your time for that evaluation be unreasonable too?
Well said.

As a result of advances in technology, news, scholarly research, books, music, film, etc. can all be created and distributed by _anyone_, because it can be done at lower cost. This is bad news for some old school money-making schemes, but good news for consumers.

Perhaps consumers on the web are getting accustomed to "free" without any focus on quality. The classic arguments that lower cost means lower quality may be weakening.

Poor analogy: The computers we use today are less expensive than the ones we used in the 1980's. But who argues that they are lower quality? (I am not suggesting whether they are or not, just pointing out the arguments that people make.)
Hello younger me.

I did go back to college and graduated. It didn't help with the impostor syndrome. It did fill in some gaps in my knowledge and opened a few career doors for me though. It was worth it, but that was due in large part to the fact that I chose to go do the first two years at community college and the last two at an inexpensive regional school.

A bit of encouragement, it is totally possible to go to school full-time while working full-time if you really want to. It just means you miss the parties and other social stuff (which I had pretty much aged out of by that point anyway).

Keep on hacking brother.
For those of you who have parents/grand-parents who lived in Europe during WW2, you should ask them what they think about the value of have some money somewhere the government doesn't know anything about (whether it is cash or in a foreign country). This is not a theoretical argument. Germany was a democracy before the war. France too. Italy too.
The correct column is the other one, 'Total overstay rate'.

Also those stats for the Romania and Bulgaria are after refusing over 15% of all Visas applied for, which is sort of a filter that prevents the number from being dramatically higher. Under the VWP there would be no such filter.

The other country to mention is Poland.
Well, I did expand the claim several times when writing the comment. The thing is, if you look at the world of the 1780ies, then there is only one democracy ( for comparison, France is still an absolute monarchy, Britain has some democratic elements but is mostly a monarchy). So it is probably some hyperbole and certainly glosses over all details, especially that cultures are interconnected, I think it is not a too strong statement.
You mean the C compiler?
I got a 3dio free space for this purpose, and it is awesome. http://3diosound.com/
https://m.soundcloud.com/moultano/bird-blind-at-the-cincinna...
> the publisher tells you they don't want your visit if you don't want their ads

Well if you say it like that, it almost sounds harmless! But that's not what they're doing.

What they are doing, is encouraging/begging people to disable their adblocker--which functions as a security (and privacy) feature of the browser--instead of telling people to go away if they want to keep it on.

Of course there's no way to nicely word an honest message that communicates "adblockers are not welcome". Especially not for a site that depends on advertising revenue, it would never get past the marketing/editors. That's a big part of the problem; the majority of advertising depends on skirting the line between honesty and dishonesty, and this attitude tends to seep into the businesses that are so dependent on advertising.

This becomes an even bigger trap if their content-quality is on the low end to begin with. I'm not familiar enough with Forbes to say that is the case for them (IIRC it's not that bad, is it?), but consider all those really shitty clickbait sites with listicles and blogspam. That's what those advertising dollars buy us. Who is more likely to stop producing content if advertising revenue drops? High-volume low-effort clickbait writers, or the "quality content" writers that actually care about the topic they write about?
He didn't, though. From another article about this:

> Tipton recruited the friend to claim the prize on his behalf by telling the person that he believed his marriage was failing and he wanted to keep the money secret from his wife in case of a divorce, according to the criminal complaint.

> [In another] instance, Tipton bought the ticket while on a trip to Oklahoma with another man who isn't named in the complaint, authorities allege. The justice of the peace asked the other man to recruit a third person to claim the ticket, once again using a story about a looming divorce. Oklahoma lottery records show that prize was paid out to Kyle Conn, the owner of a Texas construction company. The criminal complaint claims Tipton later collected a share of the money.
hello !

one great way of learning is to be able to adapt to different organisations and scenario.

i understand that what you are going through is uncomfortable, but trust me, what you would learn, would be invaluable.

the reason is, there is more madness in this world, than method.

so who survives, the one who has seen the most madness and managed to grow through or the one who has been always careful or lucky to choose the structured way.

its been one thing, that i have experienced personally and I had the same thoughts, like you. In fact, I told my boss also, that I am quitting.

but then I told myself, that all good things have originated from chaos.

so let it be...

i took that as a learning experience and continued there.

cheers!
abhishek
I find it amusing the "share everything" generation goes the other way and posts detailed diaries of their expenses online.
I'd qualify it by saying:

"With a lot of hard work, and the legal freedom to move away, anyone can break out of poverty."

Staying in the same place (sounds like your grandparents were kick ass people) is pretty much the death sentence and many people, after certain youthful indiscretions may not be permitted to leave the area.

Plus, you're white so I'm guessing you've never been detained for "matching the description".