skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's some rather more fundamental issues with the paper.

Let's do a little bit of a dive...

1. The "BSR" is 10 questions on a Likert scale with extraordinarily vague labels. So, what's the difference between "somewhat profound" and "fairly profound"? How confident are you that different populations (eg lib v con) will have similar views on the difference between "somewhat" versus "fairly"?

2. Liberal/conservatism meanwhile is a single question on a Likert scale. 1 to 7, how conservative are you? So, self-image not actual conservatism. And given 109 participants rated themselves on the liberal side versus 46 on the conservative side, it's going to be dominated by "just how extreme do you think your liberalism is?"

3. But best fun of all -

On the left, we have
1 = liberal
1 = not at all profound
1 = not at all favourable

On the right side of their questions we have
7 = conservative
5 = very profound
5 = very favourable

109 participants were Liberal (less than 4 on lib/con Likert item)
46 participants were Conservative (above 4 on lib/con Likert item)

So, just the factor of "how much do you like to tick the extreme boxes on a Likert scale" would give a correlation like the one they get.

More likely to pick a 1 than a 2 on a Likert item? You'll rank as both more liberal and less receptive to bullshit then... Like to leave a radio box on the left so you don't feel extreme? That'll register you slightly more conservative and slightly more receptive then...

And as the participant pool is 2:1 liberal:conservatism, then that extremeness factor will produce candidate correlations like the ones they get too. (More extreme-tickers are likely to be going for 1s on lib, 1 not profound, 1 not favourable of Republicans, and 5s on favourability of Democrats. Middle-of-the-road tickers are likely to be going 2s for lib, 2s for profound, 2s for Reps, and 4s for Dems they like. Higher score for bullshit receptivity, less liberal, less favourable of Dems, and more favourable (less unfavourable) of Republicans.

MeanMundane is bang on the middle (3.1 mean), neatly unaffected by "extremeness" factor, whereas MeanBullshit isn't (2.6), so extremeness will push out the "controlled" correlations neatly too.

(Yes, I'm procrastinating, and had a brief back-of-the-envelope poke around their CSV of data...)
Autify – driving UI overlay
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=775174.0

Discussion at the time: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zrshb/real_satosh...

The consensus is that it was not from the real Satoshi.

In fact the reaction to that forum post are the same as the reaction to CSW's claims: Sign it or it's worthless.
Looks like another face of a centuries-old debate between theoretical and experimental science.

The theoretical scientists play with abstractions they fully understand. Experimental scientists poke at things they don’t fully understand. They tend not to do well with each other.

When computers were in the infancy, they were viewed primarily as a scientific tools to crunch numbers and play with abstraction. That’s the theory-oriented view that I think is shared by the SICP authors.

Then computers became complex, fast, and capable of doing much more than crunching numbers and evaluating those S-expressions.
While you can view a modern web browser, or MS Word, or a videogame, as a program for a Turing complete machine, this does not mean you should. Too little value in that: sure there’re instructions and state, but now what? More experiment-oriented mindset usually works better with those kind of problems.
Dude, it has nothing to do with him cheating.

It has more to do with the fact that he called pg a "weenis" years ago, and openly criticizes YC and SV culture in general.

The rejection was basically "sry, but you aren't quite the culture fit we're looking for". Which is fine, YCF can fund whomever they want, it's their money and their prerogative.

But here's the rub.

The way I see it, the biggest irony of the whole experiment is that it was probably meant to draw non-traditional founders, because of the pseudonymous nature of HN. But in the end, biases still prevailed. Which is why hiring/funding in SV is beyond broken, as this experiment has proven empirically.

This thread is the embodiment of all the diversity problems that tech has, the root node if you will. When the decision comes down to arbitrary "gut feeling" vs. the best (candidate|founder), then you know there's a problem.

If you can't see that, then...I'm not exactly sure what to tell you. Spend more time in the Valley?
This is true. A police officer will visit your home and verify your parking spot before you are allowed to purchase a car here. It's also worth noting that many people live in high-rise buildings or other multi-tenant buildings where a private charger could be put to service for more than one vehicle.

Every Nissan dealership has a charger, and I've never seen any queue for it, but it's almost always occupied.
How and why we created the Marvel styleguide
That EULA probably wouldn't fly here in Australia. The argument would be "you can't say solely at the user's risk, as you position yourself as a premium quality brand - you're misleading consumers". IANAL, though.

This was the reason Apple had to extend warranties on their hardware here - it was pretty funny watching Apple try to argue to the government that they made non-premium stuff just like everyone else, and therefore didn't have to have the extended warranty. To which the government said, paraphrased, "cool story, bro".
> 1. Spotify - doesn't allow you to buy premium (which is availble worldwide) if you have a non-US credit card.

if you live in a country where spotify is officially available[1], you can buy premium with your local card (i pay about ~7 usd/23 brl for a two people family plan).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify#Geographic_availabilit...
My real question is if you truly are a composer and making your own music why are you just storing it on your Mac? Wouldn't you want to have a NAS for that or some sort of other storage option? I would not rely on my Mac for storage of music I thought was very important. Including rare copies of songs or songs I created myself. I would have a different more reliable storage option.

However, that is really shady on Apple's part to make that mandatory, and should be looked into.
no I mean things like this:

http://docs.couchdb.org/en/stable/cluster/nodes.html#removin...

http://docs.couchdb.org/en/stable/cluster/sharding.html#movi...

http://docs.couchdb.org/en/stable/cluster/sharding.html#resh...

sharding needs to be taken care manually, there is nowhere on the docs handling what happens in the event of a failover and no how to replace a failed populated node with an empty one so that the cluster can recover.

those are quite big concerns if sharding with a replica set for fault tolerance is the main objective.
The system cringed as its owner brought forth the open-source tool. "I am a production server!" it cried indignantly. "How dare you test me before my time! Guards!" it called. "Guards!"

Admin installed the open-source tool and looked at it. "You will be tested," he said.

"You do not dare to test me!" laughed the system.

"You will be tested," said Admin.

"Do not test me!" wept the system.

"You will be tested," said Admin.

I watched this exchange. Truly, I believed the system would be tested. It was a system, and on Gor it had no rights. Perhaps on Earth, in its permissive society, which distorts the true roles of all beings, which forces both system and operator to go unhappy and constrained, which forbids the fulfillment of owner and server, such might not happen. Perhaps there, it would not be tested. But it was on Gor now, and would undoubtedly feel its true place, that of server. It was a system. It would be tested at will. Such is the way with computer systems.

With apologies and credit to the hilarious Houseplants of Gor:
http://www.rdrop.com/~wyvern/data/houseplants.html
that’s the kind of apology I would expect from the zodiac killer..
Introduction to Information Retrieval(2008)
I think it's optimistic to think the pizza making process at Domino's involves any loose flour. I would have imagined frozen and/or refrigerated lumps of premade dough on a rack.
I'm pretty sure Craig Wright is not the real Satoshi, but if he was the real Satoshi and didn't want anyone to know, he would be going about it in exactly the right way :)
I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you saying policy is controlled by the media?
Ask HN: Can we achieve total self-sufficiency with today´s technology?
I have been a supporter of basic income for some time now, but lately I started to have some doubts about its long term feasibility. Without getting into too much detail, it is mostly because even if you have an universal basic income, the individual and communities still depend on the good will of the political system. Let´s say we have a president Trump and he decides something stupid, it could entirely obliterate or at least minimize the gained value of independence (i.e. through hyper inflation).
So instead of thinking about that idea, can we assemble a set of existing technology that would allow everyone to cover the basic needs of life?

Based on the definition of Max Neef the fundamentals human needs are:

-subsistence (i.e. food)
-protection (i.e. housing)
-affection
-understanding
-participation
-leisure
-creation
-identity
-freedom

I imagine achieving this could allow a group of individuals to accomplish independence, self sufficiency and open new ways organizing life and structure a society. A precondition would be that the toolset aims for maximum independence from existing states/ governments. While we might have not make it all the way, how far are we down that road as of today?
How do any of those things improve the lives of non-Apple citizens living in Cupertino?
It's hard for me to believe that he's backing out of his promise to provide stronger evidence because the pressure is too much, because the pressure of being known as a fraud is a lot worse than being known as an inventor.
Their blog post on WebSockets: https://blog.cloudflare.com/everybody-gets-websockets/
The coins belong to whoever (one or more) has the key.
This whole "controversy" is incredibly boring. The real Satoshi would be able to prove it easily. Prove it, or STFU and we can move on from the who is Satoshi mystery?
It can't be hard considering how stupid Siri is.
I believe that, what he wants us to take away from this, is that once he "proves" himself to be who he says he is, his life will change in ways similar, but worse, to the ways that it has since he claimed to be Satoshi. It is this change, he seems to be saying, that he is not courageous enough to face.

Sounds like B.S. to me, but who tf am I to judge?
No, that's a horrible thought. If he truly is suicidal we should be doing what we can to make sure he is cared for.
On the bright side, this will give some much-needed publicity to Tor Browser. Sci-hub is still available at http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/
It's a hard lesson for many, and it'll likely need to be learned many times over. Any number of individuals are willing to take advantage of the trustworthy nature the technology to imply that the things they do are also trustworthy.

And too often, it works - because the technology is secure, not enough people question those who are using it and proclaiming "secure" in a loud enough voice (mt gox, cryptsy, mintpal, and countless others).
You see comments like "Y does something bad too" on a story about X very frequently. May not be meant as a justification, but I think they are often distracting from the actual topic. If you went through the Terms of Service of similar services, you can probably find countless upsetting examples. So what is the conclusion? Let's just take it as it is, because everyone is doing it or abandon all services instead?
>Banks do not intermediate funds when lending they create new money. This has interest due on it. Create more to cover the interest or die.

Professor Franz Hormann of the Vienna University of Economics further elaborates on this catch-22 in his banned TED talk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYWVbdSX7B4
One possible explanation to the whole thing not being considered so much is that he has the delusion of being Satoshi and might be trying to prove it and failing to understand why he can't.
News discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11629649
The only blamable thing in this story is that the so called mainstream media are not technically knowledgeable enough to "scientifically" check their news sources. Good thing, all the nerds around have exposed the scheme in such a short time, I like this era !!
I run win10 at home since beta and also admin multiple windows machines at work. None have that issue. I would say with utmost certainty that something else is amiss. All of my machines run faster and smoother on win10.
You could always try XBee. The XBee Pro modules are a bit expensive (~$50 each), but they can reach up to 15 miles or more, albeit at fairly low baud rates. The Pro-900 XSC ( https://www.sparkfun.com/products/11634 ) can stretch up to 28 miles with just its wire antenna. There's also LoRaWAN, which is even longer range but still low bandwidth and $$.
Web Project Timings
It's funny how you quote the bible as if it had any authority on profundity, given that it is full of equally vacuous bullshit, including the verses you quote.

It seems to me like that demonstrates (a) how real the effect is that this study measured, and (b) what the basic mechanism is that makes it happen: Religious people tend to start with statements that they have decided they want to believe without any actual reason and then they go out and try to find reasons, no matter how metaphorical or analogous these reasons might be, and thus no matter how much these reasons actually logically and empirically support the statement at hand. Scientifically minded people on the other hand tend to reject statements until they have evidence that supports them, so they aren't invested into finding reasons to believe, because they care more about what is actually true.

That's also why religions consistently fail at discovering true facts about the world (or in other words: why they fail at rejecting bullshit), while science yields all the progress we make in understanding the world (which in particular means rejecting all the bullshit).
@bwilliams, yep, and that's why I said "I understand this". We should help him. But we should also help, if not more, Gavin and the others who's reputation is on the line without much fault of their own.
If he is not Satoshi and just wanted the attention:

Narcissists have an incredible high rate of suicide, because when they fall from their high horse, the floor is quite some way down and the landing is too hard for them. Rather than being found out as fake, go with a bang... I fear the bang coming...

This note kind of worries me a little bit... no matter what he did wrong, I hope he will be okay.
Why execute the JS? Just parse the JSON (I'm just guessing here). No need to mess with DOM or JS.
Charisma is no doubt a factor and you could probably explain Trump making it to Republican Candidate that way but I don't think he'll beat Hillary in spite of being more charismatic.

Occam's razor says favour the simplest explanation and I think here that would be voters weigh a few factors including charisma and policy.

As an aside I bet on Trump at 11:1 based Scott Adams hypothesis but plan to cover at 2:1 (on Betfair).
That's really an incredible story, and I doubt that it exists in a vacuum. I'd really like to see a piece about companies like yours and others that were impacted heavily by algorithm changes.

The part that probably bothers me the most is that if the MetaFilter founder didn't have a direct connection to Matt Cutts, it probably would've just been the end of his site at the scale he was at.
Are you low-balling yourself?
.cc still works for those who need it
Will we still need semantic html?
If AI screen readers and search bots learn to read and understand full screen responsive SVGs, will we still need semantic html?
Cool site with stickers for Telegram
REPL online
iOS Supporting IPv6-Only Networks
Apparently, in the article's comment section the word "bullshit" triggers a profanity filter.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/comment?id=info%3Ad...
It does for me anyway, must depend on browser and device.
Unlimited sick leave? If you are permanently disabled in Canada a company will keep paying your wages until you die? That sounds implausible, but even if it's true you could presumably expect some appreciation in your wages that you will not get if you can never work again.
thanks for collecting these. I was very curious what the research team thought constituted "profound sounding bullshit". now that I've seen it I am inclined to believe that this is actually just some kind of cultural or communication gaps. quite a few of those sentences can be "translated" to very pedestrian, non-controversial, and obvious sounding statements that even the most hard nosed materialist scientist would probably accept. Let me try a few.

> Wholeness quiets infinite phenomena

Translation: a healthy and balanced lifestyle is helpful for the purpose of feeling less bothered/annoyed/irritated by the things in the world.

> Imagination is inside exponential space time events

Translation: Imagination is a behavior of the mind/brain

> We are in the midst of a self aware blossoming of being that will align us with the nexus itself

Translation: Recently, more people have expressed in interest in spiritual and religious practice

are my translations good or meaningful? am I just falling into the bullshit trap myself? who knows. I think we would all benefit from being less judgmental of others who communicate using different symbols and turns of phrase than the ones we are accustomed to, though. Its a pretty vicious and petty culture that disparages people who have different preferences for their favorite metaphors. I'm really failing to see the benefit in saying "this is bullshit and if you believe it isn't then you're an idiot." which seems to largely be the point of the research.

and yes, I do know that some of these were generated semi-randomly by a computer program. that doesn't exclude the potential for meaning. the words were chosen by someone originally, after all. language is tricky. the words can mean things beyond the original context they were produced in.
> I would argue that internal narratives like this are inherently anti-statistical.

They're not. Those narratives are based on what they experienced. In this case, what they experienced are stories in the form of movies, TV, video games, anecdotes from peers, and Bible stories.

Now they didn't really experience them, but I'd posit the mechanisms in their mind really don't know the difference between what's real and what isn't. It doesn't matter if stories are real, all the matters is that they are the focal point of attention.

Think about it. The brain can very much be statistical, but the quality of the statistics is only as good as the data a brain is fed.
Akari
The article you linked to appears to describe something totally different. It says that if you delete your music from your computer, then re-downloading the music through Apple Music will give you DRMed files. But it also says:

> If you haven’t deleted your own copies of your music, then there’s nothing to worry about. If you download onto other devices from Apple Music, those devices will get the DRM versions, but you’ll still have your DRM-free originals.
This isn't about a lack of expandable storage (all Macs have at least one USB port, some come with SD card slots), but rather that a lot of Macs come with very small SSDs.

I can totally see how this might have seemed like a good idea. Shame it's just... not.
At this point, this is bordering on performance art.

(For what it's worth, I'm torn on this note: on the one hand, it's deeply upsetting that someone is writing that they're feeling such torment; on the other hand, should it turn out to have been written insincerely, he's just made it a tonne more difficult for anyone else who does legitimately express feelings like this. No winners.)
I'm not doing that. In fact, I'm objecting to the entire premise of the link.
I know what cryptocurrency is but I have hardly followed what goes on. I am somewhat familiar with the recent event involving Wright.

Could someone tell me, in plain English, if there are any challenges in Wright divulging the information needed to verify that he is Satoshi?
tl;dr:

"through the Apple Music subscription [...] Apple now deletes files from its users [...] iTunes evaluated my massive collection of Mp3s and WAV files, scanned Apple’s database for what it considered matches, then removed the original files from my internal hard drive. REMOVED them. Deleted. If Apple Music saw a file it didn’t recognize—which came up often, since I’m a freelance composer and have many music files that I created myself—it would then download it to Apple’s database, delete it from my hard drive, and serve it back to me when I wanted to listen, just like it would with my other music files it had deleted."
I've always wondered if/how that works on power users that opens multiple results on multiple tabs right after searching.
Or you learn to work efficiently and finish your homework in the minutes between classes, the bus rides to and from school, and perhaps 1-2 hours immediately after getting home.

Unless things have changed substantially (and they may have), that was all the time I needed for everything but research papers and projects requiring more thought.

Self-discipline and time management can solve most of these problems. My parents forbade video games and TV until my homework was done, and I was honest as a kid (most of the time). So I got my shit done so I could do what I wanted to do (watch Batman and Animaniacs, run through the woods like a mad man).

Homework doesn't train you to be anything other than what you (really, your parents at that age) allow it to.
An interesting variation of this was pointed out to me by a colleague while I worked in a very large company. We would often get requests from management to size various efforts. Often it would be hard to accurately guesstimate how long something would take. (Do we get to use a team of the companies most experienced kernel developers? Or will it be work done by some external company?) My colleague pointed out that often the management team had already made the decision and were just looking for numbers to justify their plan. They had a budget, but wouldn't reveal it.

This meant that realistic sizings were often met with skepticism. "Do you really think that would take 22 person-years of effort?" Predictably, this led to the decision being made without the sizing (why did we have to spend two weeks on the estimate just to have it thrown out) or with an unrealistic adjustment made to the sizing (again why bother with the estimate). I hated the idea that the most experienced developers where treated like they weren't really onboard with the company's goals (because of the more conservative estimates), while crazy proposals for version two (with specifications for new features measuring 3 feet high) were thought to be genius; this led to version 2 being a year late and two-thirds of it's features jettisoned by the time of the release--along with the promotion of everyone that had made the worst mistakes.

I worked at one company where the senior staff finally outlawed the posting of Dilbert cartoons on the development floors.
Scientists Want to Clean Up Cow Farts to Save the Planet
I don't wish harm onto him but to me this reads as a continued cry for attention.
I think the primary function of mass schooling is to warehouse kids somewhere off the streets and out of the workplace, avoiding having to adapt adult spaces to kids being around. There's a secondary function as a meaningless token mill, for use in pseudo meritocracy. And a tertiary function, much underfunded, of education.
World Will Run Out of Fresh Water in 2050 Says Leaked Report