skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Dan, I downvoted you accidentally (my apologies), but I still disagree with you.

I have yet to see any proof that AirBnB cares for anything other than to expand their reach and profitability. They'll partner with local governments to support tax collection, as its in their best interests (and costs them little but engineering time, as the tax is passed through to the customer/host), but its also in their best interest to disregard externalities such as that caused by less than desirable AirBnB customers.

EDIT: They're the less abrasive version of Uber. Disruption needs to be balanced with societal benefits. Your startup does not exist in a vacuum, and you are one piece of legislation or court decision away from being regulated out of existence. Behave accordingly.
How does Word work out when multiple collaborators are writing at once? One of the cool things about version controlling LaTeX is that conflicts, merges, etc are dealt with using standard tools, which is super helpful when you have collaborators across the globe furiously writing and redoing figures a few days before a deadline.
I learned to appreciate static typing after "diving into" a large Python codebase. Even with a good IDE (PyCharm), it was freaking hard to understand what the heck was going on. With all the fun in quick prototyping, there's no way I'm going to use a dynamic language for anything serious.
TED talks are a great example.
You're telling me that all I need to do to build the institution of my dreams is provide people with a sense of meaning!? LOL.

I do the things I do because I like them and others find at least some of them valuable, and there's probably a significant chunk of biological determination behind my enjoyment of those things. And that biological determination is enough intrinsic value in my "meaning games" to satisfy my existential angst. I went on this whole meaning search in my early 20s which I'm just completing and came to similar conclusions, but apparently on a lighter note after going through my Debbie Downer bouts.

(1) Sunlight and exercise. (2) Friends and good conversation. (3) Women. (4) Pursuit of goals. (5) Altruism.

Rinse and repeat. Good enough for me. When I'm feeling down, it can be at least partially attributed to not checking one of the above boxes.
I both agree and disagree.

Philosophy _is_ a disciple, but it is an unusual one in that the answers to philosophical questions contain the seeds of other disciplines. It is kind of a meta-discipline.

Like any other human practice some are better at it and some are worse, agreed.

Logic is no more central to philosophy than it is to any other human activity. What is central to philosophy is _abstraction_. From that vantage point it more closely resembles software engineering than any other human activity and, I would argue, and this distinction is going to blur over time as the use of computers becomes habitual, as it must, within the activity of philosophy.

I think the counter-argument to this article is -- these great philosophers must be in our midst so why is it that we do not recognise them? That is the question that should have been asked. But to finish with a bit of snark, apologies in advance, the ability to ask that question takes a certain philosophical mindset.
This is like a way to encourage an athlete to go to the gym and do their lifts each day, it isn't the Big Game in itself.
As the pace of innovation in healthcare continues to increase exponentially, 40 will be the new 30 and eventually the new 20. People who are 40 now might live to 120. Am I being too optimistic? Probably. But I wouldn't be surprised if a whole lot of us live a LOT longer than our grandparents did.
While it is clearly slanted it asks good questions. Questions where respect is due. No one has asked what the election looks like if Kasich and Sanders run as independents.

That said, politics inflame passions, and without on the ground analysis its hard to distinguish whining about your candidate losing, from actual election manipulation.
Type propagation.
Surprises me it doesn't have syntax highlighting.
I'll note that while the code quality in Rust is pretty good (clean/usually commented/well formatted/tested), it's not exactly idiomatic Rust.

This is because Rust as a language has changed a lot, and the compiler still has old code that was written the "old way" and not updated to use better or more idiomatic alternatives (e.g. elision, if let, etc). Servo is in a similar situation. This is slowly improving as we run clippy on Rust and in occasional manual refactorings (for example when sty was renamed to TypeVariants and ty_foo was renamed to TyFoo to be have the correct capitalization -- the old capitalization was years old), but there still is work to do to make it completely idiomatic.

So if you want to learn how to write idiomatic Rust, I would avoid using the Rust repo as a source. Newer repos and new code in the Rust repo is pretty okay, though.
Can you explain more about using Node for the front end? Do you mean you use `npm` for front-end package management, or are you running a Node server process along side your Go process on the backend?
What will be age of retirement in the future is an interesting question. I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.
Plato and Aristotle developed principles of thinking about the world that laid foundation for science, mathematics, ethics, and other fields of study.
Given the lack of CCR in the RISC-V I doubt that he would be very impressed by it's ease of use..
I need to point to this result: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080207140855.h...

"Third Cousins Have Greatest Number Of Offspring, Data From Iceland Shows"

Because some of studies (of smell) contradict with others (on fertility).
Malory Isn’t the Only Imposter in Infosec
Well did you report them to the proper authorities ? ( the organization managing the building, the city the cops ), because I can assure you it will shut down any illegal hotel quite fast.
Another way to look at it: Sorting is linear in the size of the input in bytes, but not item count. It's only comparison sort that happens to be O(n log n).
Thought this looked familiar, this is from February and they still have the source as "coming soon (tm)".

So until that coming soon becomes released I'm not really all that bothered by this thing.
I cannot recommend Understanding and Using C Pointers by Richard Reese highly enough (http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Using-Pointers-Richard-R...)

Learning C syntax is pretty easy. Learning to use the standard library is mostly a matter of reading man pages and other people's code. But I found understanding pointers and memory management completely opaque until I read that book. It definitely brought me from "beginning C hacker flailing about" to "intermediate C hacker flailing about in a more dangerous way".
Linux 4.5 perf folded format
I've never been critical of devuan, only what I consider unfounded accusations against systemd. But yeah, I probably went a bit overboard! Would have been better if I had written a blog post I guess.

If someone chooses SysV init, I'm not at all concerned, it's a different way of running a system and very effective. I was very happy with it over the years!

My main issues are the following oft repeated claims:

1. systemd is monolithic and breaks the Unix philosophy of do one thing and do it well. It's not modular.

2. systemd is hard to configure

3. systemd breaks logging and forces the sysadmin to use binary formats

4. systemd uses binary configurations/is a binary blob/is undocumented

5. systemd has 70 binaries, each horribly intertwined

As an example, I read a post the other day that stated that the binary log file format is deliberately undocumented [1], but the format has been documented since at least 2013... [2]

The amount of misconceptions and wilful mischaracterisations if systemd really rankles me. There are issues, like some of the library linkages aren't great, but the objections given against systemd are normally technically incorrect and often what is written is so bile laden that if you took out the opinion the material would leave a paragraph worth of material...

Which is why, IMO, when Debian used their robust processes to technically decide on moving to systemd it was chosen on technical grounds and not religious ones. Which tends to prove, at least in my mind, that Debian remains a very strong project :-)

1. http://lpar.ath0.com/2014/05/18/why-i-dont-like-systemd/

2. https://secure.freedesktop.org/cgit/www/commit/Software/syst...
All true, up to a point at least. Strong, static type systems aren't universal wins with no drawbacks.

However, I think it's fair to say that even the "strongish, staticish" type systems in a lot of mainstream languages can still prove very useful properties that are often sources of bugs in the more dynamic languages. A good example would be not accidentally allowing null values to be passed around, as mentioned elsewhere in this discussion. And of course some of less well known but still not uncommon languages, such as the popular functional programming choices or newer offerings like Rust, can do quite a lot more without their type systems becoming an unreasonable burden.
Unless you're the one that dies and becomes the scientific proof.
That's an idea I've been thinking about. But I have a few responses that have been bouncing around my head on that topic.

- Do we need much faster hardware for most tasks people are actually trying to accomplish? I don't think software is necessarily becoming more complex. It could be simplified it's just rushed out the door. I think complexity has plateaued. A common run of the mill usecase of application-layer software, a CRM, isn't limited by CPython (and definitely not by PyPy) today and there's no reason why it would start tomorrow.

- Something new will come along for hardware. So it actually is inevitable it moves forward. This isn't anywhere near the end. It may stratify hardware. If you truly need more performance, it may be very expensive hardware. The rest of us will rely on servers running on 7nm chips for ages. In connection to this point, the machine I'm typing this on is from 2009. A Q9450, it's still more CPU processing power than I need. I think that says a lot. The only reason I want to upgrade is for less power draw because that means less heat produced. If I needed more power for video, 3D rendering or compilation I'd use networked processing which would annihilate any local big iron I could put up in my basement.

- More development platforms will dump everything that isn't LLVM based. Significant gains could be had if say, Python was reimplemented on top of LLVM.

- For cases where the everyman company needs more power, they won't go for the chips made out of brain tissue or diamonds. They'll use services like AWS to gleam the power needed which will have the more expensive hardware on-top or massive swaths of 7nm CPUs to utilize.

- Chips will increasingly be built for specific tasks. Dropbox will keep having custom designs built by Intel for their specific workload. The general-use CPU will become less popular in the server room but still there for the small to midsize companies to lean on.

So while there's some individual points there, to add the always beloved car analogy. I've downgraded my car from a 325HP model 10 years ago to a 145HP model that I've been using since. Both got the job done within their environment and I suspect at worst, chips will simply become a commodity closer to modern day cars. The advance won't be more HP or better brakes, those are mostly maxed out in capacity. The paradigm shift is where the advancement will be (electrics for cars). But it's been settled for a while that either way, I really don't need over 150HP for what I'm doing.
Hm... I never bothered with altruism. Is it really worth it?
Options are inherently risky and should be accepted as compensation with the knowledge that there is a non-zero chance that they might turn out to be worth nothing. What's described in the article is an interesting way for those options to be effectively worthless, but it's not materially different (for an option-holding employee without unlimited means) from Uber going bankrupt or having all unvested options cancelled as part of an acquisition.

If an employee wants guaranteed compensation, they can negotiate for a cash-only package. If they want stock-based compensation that is not vulnerable to this particular loophole, they can go work for a publicly traded company that hands out RSUs.
I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.

So working is literally worse than death?
Because most forms of media we have emphasize day-to-day thoughts and useless information, rather than act as a forum for discussion with likeminded people.
Ah! Thanks - I didn't see this! Appreciate the info :-)
Virtual Reality Card Game
Yep, exactly as recommended to others: police and council. This is why you need to invoke them early: you'll need to establish a documented history of anti social behaviour.
Corporations lose money through regulation and lives are saved. I'm sure you can see why many Americans are horrified by it: they value money over human lives.
Yes, altruism balances egocentrism.
That link just contains a throw-away mentiin if migratory routes "imprinted on their genetic memory", no evidence that it is factual.
> Logic is no more central to philosophy than...

I filled my mandatory philosophy credit hours many years ago, so this might be a very silly question: what happens when a product of philosophy can be demonstrated to logically not follow? It was my impression that such a product would be discarded, making logic extremely important in philosophy - unlike, unfortunately, many other human endeavors.
I disagree. Maybe the prohibitions being statutory is a bit strong but I think products should be proven safe before they're allowed.

The burden of proof shouldn't be on the government, it should be on the manufacturer, similar to how medicines require FDA approval.
I'm not sure it's that simple. In London we have no limit and it's now one of the most expensive places on this planet and despite that it's increasingly impossible to find an apartment.

Maybe there is some other cause (e.g. everyone wants to live in a city now)?
I enjoy people. I started at one of the lower rungs of society and have been able to do well for myself through a lucky concoction of genes, being born in the USA, and having the body of human knowledge at my fingertips. Not everyone is so lucky, and I imagine if I ever come into some serious money that I'll be using it to level the playing field for others. The effective altruism movement intrigues me as well.
It takes 5-10 years of work to retire.

http://www.amazon.com/Early-Retirement-Extreme-Philosophical...

http://earlyretirementextreme.com/
IAP were something he/she was specifically trying to avoid.
Actual indentured servants were / are treated far far worse than the average startup employee. Besides that, no one forces employees to accept equity in lieu of decent salary. Comparing startup employees to indentured servants is a horrifyingly privileged way to frame the topic.
I don't think anyone believes that the issue with indentured servitude is that it was enforced by contract. As a society, we have decided that there are certain things you can't sign away (e.g., your freedom) and there are certain things you can (e.g., your right to exchange an illiquid asset for cash).

The GP's point is that calling this arrangement "indentured servitude" is more than a little dramatic.
More reasonable than the alternative?

> "whereas the U.S. only bans them if people have already been harmed as a result of consuming said products"

I think those people harmed would disagree.

Also to "scientifically prove" something might not be as easy as it sounds. You may have a couple of studies that find a harmful effect, and then you have some (possibly industry-backed) studies that find no effect at all. You now have a strong hint, but no proof. At best it is "scientifically debated". Think of tobacco industry vs "smoking causes cancer", or oil companies vs "global warming is caused by humans".
I am not sure that such a divorce would be a good thing, but if it were done there is no reason we should read the Enneads, or indeed any of the classical works.

Do away with history and authors both. Keep the ideas and arguments, but in modern form, and on a modern foundation.
To your point of meta-fields, many of the smartest people I've known across many fields are Philosophy and X, with X being Physics, Economics, Political Science and Computer Science amongst others.
I created a Trello board with a backlog of things that might interest me, then pick things out of it as time allows, opportunities present themselves, etc. I described the process at http://aaronsumner.com/posts/2015/12/personal-research-board...
Airbnb is the only reason we visited Berlin. Without it, I doubt we would return.
I really wonder, what's the difference between computer science and mathematics?

It seems like CS is a subset of math.
My guess would be that they'd be gently shunned, so would probably be weighing up the relative merit of some (possibly short term) popularity against longer term merit of being able to effectively collaborate with party & peers.
Yes, they were literally handcuffed.
Employees have plenty of rights, you're talking about giving them additional privileges. No one forces people to take equity compensation instead of salary and as long as employees continue to do so the practice will continue.
Sabotage of Verizon hardware goes from six incidents per year to 26 per week
Show HN: Strategy maps for software development
This was only in the early versions of the MIPS architecture though (MIPS I, I think?). Later versions required the interlocks, so the add would stall rather than misbehaving, and you didn't need to actually put a nop in the load delay slot (though being able to schedule some useful insn into it was still performance-wise worthwhile). Since MIPS I implementations are a distant memory, in practice this in-retrospect misfeature is now ignorable these days. (In contrast, branch delay slots cannot be forgotten about because you can't backwards-compatibly change the branch insn behaviour; the best you can do is add new branch instructions which don't execute the delay slot insn, which MIPS has also done to some extent.)

Both load delay slots and branch delay slots are allowing the microarchitecture (a simple 3-stage pipeline) to dictate architecture, which is a classic way to store up pain for the future.
>Uploading your code to Github isn't a solution

Why not? This sounds like exactly the solution. It's no burden on the researcher - they don't have to alter their research methods to fit a new system, they just dump the code, and leave it up to other users to reimplement.

Building web tools to allow research sounds like precisely the wrong solution, at least in the short to medium term. Research funding doesn't go far enough as it is, you're not going to get researchers changing their processes entirely for no gain. What if they need custom hardware, or access to tools and libraries that haven't been implemented?

Sharing _is_ default and easy. That's why Github has exploded.
I, for one, would fund this study, if only for the joy of knowing that it is occurring.
They would probably be chastised by their respective parties.
Truth is a pathless land[1], but that doesn't stop us from forming our own truths.

I think my truth is superior because,

Its based on observed reality, eg: cultural taboo's against incest

Has practical applications in the form Evolutionary psychology.

Is internally consistent.

Most importantly doesn't take grim view of culture as something that we are slaves to, something that can chew us and spit us out after it has no use for us, something separate from me. The stance that author seems to have taken.

1 - blanking on where I got that from.
I too use a netbook (Lenovo x120e) and an Xperia mini pro. I want to replace both and really like the look of the Asus X205TA but there doesn't seem to be any updare on the mini pro. The Pyra seems awkwardly in between the two, without the advantages of either.
No, not at the moment, but 60 something years from now it probably will be; that's a lot of time to spend making bits flip so some man or woman I'll likely never meet can be advertised to in some new innovative disruptive way (or whatever mundane/evil task your industry is involved in).
Food, diapers, and free wifi: Japan relies on 7-11 for quake relief efforts
making research reproducible with publications that actually contain their code (in addition to prose and graphs, all connected together) is one of the goals of Beaker Notebook, which has a publication server where you can share such results, and then with one click open them up in the cloud, modify them as you see fit, and then run them again (if you have seen Beaker before, this last part, the cloud hosted version, is new as of last week).

http://beakernotebook.com and
https://lab.beakernotebook.com/#/publications/featured
What’s So Special About Andreessen Horowitz?
you can't keep 20th century energy growth going for much more than another century or two before waste heat alone causes catastrophic climate change.

That seems unlikely to me, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

I would imagine that all of the waste heat produced through the world's economy is several orders of magnitude lower than the sun. Like less than 0.0001%.
Okay, first of all, that's bullshit.

ISDS (Investor-State Dispute Settlement) is a sane concept. The implementation might have problems (for example closed courtroom "trials"), but it's not about protecting profits. It's about protecting equality and fairness for all before the law, and in case of States, holding them accountable to make fair and egalitarian laws.

What's the typical example? A random Company invests in a country, sets up a nice subsidiary starts doing business, everything is legal. But the country (the State) sees that it's taking up the market, uh-oh,

a) better make a law against whatever they are doing, or
b) better make a law against (that specific or all) foreign companies doing whatever.

Which one(s) is (are) problematic?

Also, the other thing, fairness, comes in when a State wants to buy out a company but doesn't want to pay market price. Basically eminent domain without unfair compensation.

The same goes for ending tax breaks (or other investment incentives) sooner than promised. Because that's a breach of agreement.

Your link (publicfinanceinternational.org) refers an article from globaljustice.co.uk which has a list of problematic ISDS arbitration cases, that's the real data, anything else is just fluff. ( http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/re... )

Let's look at the big bully US agribusiness vs Mexico (the rules of arbitration are set by NAFTA).

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c42198.htm

http://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita... the concrete "award" (findings of the tribunal).

It turns out that these tribunals are looking at laws and apply them. Like courts. And they are much likely more objective than any court in either host country. And then that award was reviewed by the courts of a place chosen by the parties (the Ontario court system).

Seems quite like due process to me.

I'm not saying all of the cases are jolly good and there was absolutely no problematic awards, but just looking at the Vodafone vs India one, the "retrospective capital gains tax" hits us and makes you wonder, what the fuck were the Indians thinking, first rule of how to legislate. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_certainty )

But enough on ISDS. There are big problems with TTIP, but not this one.
Sure if you want to live your life like a robot for five years then it's totally doable. That approach takes extreme discipline which most people do not have. Also kids throw a wrench into that strategy.