skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He makes 8 points, but the last 7 are all things that are presumably true throughout a person's career in philosophy/academia. The only condition that changes when one gets tenure is #1, and I believe that's the root of it. But I don't look at it in terms of freedom, but rather of adversity -- adversity as a BENEFIT, that the tenured faculty (or the miserable lottery winner) abruptly LOSES. Adversity is what gives life meaning, improves us as people, and (paradoxically) creates happiness. You are a knife and adversity is the rock against which you sharpen yourself. Not necessarily because you need a sharp knife, but because a knife is best when it's at its most knife-like. Heirs, except when they reject or are excommunicated from the family fortune, usually have no concept of adversity and grow up to be shitty, weak people. They never have to strive and hence never learn what they're made of. Once you get tenure, that is what you lose.
They run USB, it doesn't matter what OS is on the other side.
'artificial intelligence' seems a reasonable descriptive term for such things to me. I don't think it's inaccurate.

It's artificial, so it doesn't have to work in the same way as human intelligence, and it doesn't carry any inherent claim about the level of intelligence, so ought to be able to cover stuff that's no way near the power of the best of human intelligence.
IMEI can be recovered once you throw the sticker away. A private key that can be used to install new software cannot be recovered, or if it can that's a huge security risk.
Better to crash (and restart quickly into a known state) than to enter a rare, untested code path.
The hardest part of an Ivy League degree is getting in. No guarantee of education.
The main sentence is:

> Sorry, but I’m not sympathatic to the problems of journalists who decide to tell a distorted story because they are either too lazy or don’t have enough space to tell the right story.

It's popular in other fields. There are a lot of articles that try to explain quantum mechanics using wrong unintelligible metaphors, but for me it's not clear what part of the unintelligibility is due to the bad metaphors and what part is due to the real unintelligibility of QM.

(For some lucky coincidence, other topics I know like Harmonic Analysis are not popular topics for wrong metaphor writers.)

Anyway, if you want to read a version of the article with more technical details and less discussion about the journalism, I recommend the second article linked there: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/research...
And it's clearly there so employees can get back to work faster and stay on location for lunch. Is it more efficient to have catered rather than outside food? Does it taste better? Is it healthier? It's hard to say. I think the companies around there will keep catering around.

A lot of excess is more blatant.
The difference (I believe) is the people taking out these loans are professional real estate investors with good credit.
Do they really check every car, one by one, to make sure they have all the required equipment? Sounds time intensive.
He has it right - nobody cares. Even when people are made aware, they still don't care. Look at the security debacle of Snapchat, not to mention its lack of ethics. Even when the issues were exposed, the majority of users didn't care. Same with FB privacy. It's not just a matter of awareness. You have to almost throw a wrench at people to wake the majority up.
PayPal customers will crowdfund at their own risk starting in June
The median course grade at Harvard has been A- for over 20 years.

It's inflated, but then again, how much Harvard coursework mastery is actually necessary for your job?
No, you're doing just fine. You see, some theists cling to their religion so strongly, that they have difficulty imagining how they would interpret the world without god. So right and wrong, come from god. Meaning of life comes from god. etc, etc. The op even imagines happiness requires god.

So they take that point of view, remove god from it, and then apply what they imagine to atheists. And it's never good. You get these ridiculous ideas like atheists must all be nihilists; must be immoral; etc.
For software critical to human life, test the rare code paths.
I don't think it plays a role it would more be a level playing field if they were not using schools and diplomas as a signal for employment.

A lot of people agree that our main problem is that our managers are shit while our engineers are ok.
If you don't know how and when and where and exactly what format to file your documents, you don't get approval. Simply working isn't sufficient. It's a complex process and having well connected experts is of extreme value.
The Tesla Model S scored 82% for adult protection and 77% for child protection in the Euroncap crash tests: http://www.euroncap.com/en/results/tesla/model-s/7897

That's quite a bit below best in class: http://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/best-in-class-car...

If you have the money for a Tesla you then you would be crazy not to put your kids in a Volvo (if safety is your priority).
Interesting, but from your description it sounds like if I can get my hands on someone else's Chromebook I can still put it into developer mode and install my own software on it, right? Sure, this mostly prevents someone from using a Chromebook that someone else installed malicious software on, though if that other person had time to open the case they could even get around that. But this doesn't solve the case of I have a device with private info on it, you get the device, and want to bypass the security measures on the device to get at my data. Or in other words, it doesn't solve the situation seen in the recent Apple vs FBI case.
Funny thing about this "God" concept of yours. If I take two people from the same church -- even if they're sitting next to each other in the same pew, singing from the same songbook and sharing the same Bible -- and interrogate them in two separate rooms, their accounts of who God is and what God wants will eventually diverge.

That's a bit awkward for those who find pleasure and comfort in rigorous thinking, isn't it?
Why you can't copy-paste WeChat into the West
Message buses and queues are far, far easier to manage than API endpoints across a bunch of loci of control, so this may be why it's not discussed as much as, say, how the lifecycle of REST services work. Topics and queues with different segmentation features are much more powerful and fine-grained in control compared to a service that's tied to HTTP transport than, say, a REST or SOAP API. For object serialization / marshaling, you can use a lot more stuff now all of a sudden like Protocol Buffers, Capn Proto, Thrift, Avro. The recommended advice comes down to what your bus / queue is (each one offers vastly different best practices and features to implement them) as well as how you want to scale out and up. But perhaps a general set of terminologies / jargon may be worth pursuing as a community for the problem.

The question I really have is how people have managed to upgrade their message bus and to keep availability high with rollback contingencies while upgrading, say, RabbitMQ or Kafka across all your connected services. I really don't hear about that as much as how to do rolling restarts / upgrades of nodes for a service endpoint using some feedback from monitoring and metrics.
Maciej said, beforehand, that he thought the YCF+money would be an opportunity for Pinboard.

Afterward, he said (a) that he wanted to get what he deserved as a the winner, phrased as "give me my 20k", and (b) that he didn't actually need $20,000 as an investment with no other context.

Both of these positions seem eminently reasonable.
Aside from the fear and trembling eventuated by religion, we have happy atheistic philosophies. This just came up from the fortune program, for example:

If there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing
of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur
of this life.
-- Albert Camus

That pretty well describes my philosophy, and I'm reasonably happy.
Pretty sure most frameworks support "one weird trick" style learning.

Eg Caffe: https://github.com/BVLC/caffe/blob/master/docs/multigpu.md
I take offense at your comment. It's rude and completely wrong. What people are describing is opt-in security, and it's a model that is wildly inappropriate for any kind of consumer hardware.
The most important factor in the success of a child is arguably the stability of their home life. A poor kid with two dedicated parents can very easily get further in life than the wealthy child of a nasty divorce. And left in the dust is the kid that was "raised by the wolves," so to speak, in a ghetto, no matter how much government assistance the family receives to normalize their situation. Higher income of course confers countless perks that the highest achievers can take advantage of, but when understanding the majority of the population it is most useful as a heuristic for stability of home life.

It is nearly impossible to do justice to both sides when they are starting from such different places in life. How do you level the playing field when one was read bedtime stories to since they were a toddler and the other entered school not knowing how to read? How does the kid from an average nuclear family fare with the kids whose parents cannot even be trusted to feed them? How does a kid sheltered in a quiet suburban neighborhood feel safe around a kid that grew up fighting on the streets?

For decades the focus of the system has very clearly been on trying to offset the damage incurred in the home life of these children. And sadly, it has utterly failed at fixing multigenerational poverty. Indeed, policies stemming from No Child Left Behind seem to have made the problem even worse, raising generations of problem children who have been emboldened by weak administration that provides little consequence for consistently disrupting classes or assaulting students or even teachers!

The sad truth is that you can't fix home problems at school, and that our educational and social policies have only enabled the proliferation of broken homes.
FYI: This blog post is from September 29, 2010.
There are two aspects to the BDFL model: 1) a BD, 2) FL. There are several OSS projects with a BD, but who is not FL. For example, I co-founded the Biopython project, which has rotated through several leaders.

Jo Freeman encourages several principles, one of which is:

> Rotation of tasks among individuals. Responsibilities which are held too long by one person, formally or informally, come to be seen as that person's "property" and are not easily relinquished or controlled by the group. Conversely, if tasks are rotated too frequently the individual does not have time to learn her job well and acquire the sense of satisfaction of doing a good job.

This is an argument against a BDFL. Note that even in Python development, van Rossum does not always have the final say. Mark Shannon was the "BDFL-Delegate" for the type hints PEP 484.

The main point of the essay is not that overt power is inherently abuse, but rather describes methods to limit abuse of both overt and implicit power. Emphasis mine in the following:

> If the movement is to grow beyond these elementary stages of development, it will have to disabuse itself of some of its prejudices about organization and structure. There is nothing inherently bad about either of these. They can be and often are misused, but to reject them out of hand because they are misused is to deny ourselves the necessary tools to further development.
No advantage. It's still all wires inside the computer and the monitor.
How many CS grads from Ohio state are getting $150k start in SV it NY? To get nothing of the growth 10 years later
That implementation is wrong in multiple ways. First of all, it should return the pre-increment value. Second, it doesn't actually increment your variable (you need to use an `inout` parameter for that).

Perhaps this demonstrates perfectly why it's being removed!
> What is science? natural philosophy!

It was, back a long time ago, but the natural philosophers fell away as more technical knowledge came to be required to advance the field.

> What is mathematics/computer-science? modern philosophy!

Not really, no. It doesn't provide any guidance for life and it doesn't grapple with any of the big questions, even to say they're meaningless. It isn't philosophy as anyone defines the term.

> The holy grail of computer-science is artificial intelligence!

That's the "holy grail" of one sub-field, maybe. Not the whole field by a long shot.
It's dismissive if the cause is not actually anxiety.

Your entire argument only works if you accept the premise that this condition stems from anxiety alone. Since you have accepted this with what appears to be near certainty, then of course the rest of your argument makes sense to you, and your diagnosis of anxiety probably feels compassionate and sensitive.

To a person who does not share your confidence that anxiety is the only factor in play here, your dismissal of other possible factors is crazy-making.

Just acknowledging that there might be a factor here we don't fully understand would be enough. It's fine if anxiety is the best diagnosis and treatment plan given what we know right now. But the certainty that it's the entire story is off-putting.

You said yourself that depression/anxiety for physical symptoms are "diagnoses of exclusion, coming long after everything else has been exhausted." They are a fallback when you don't have another explanation. So why do you present a fallback diagnosis with certainty?
It's not really true that the only thing that changes once you get tenure is decompression. The other thing that changes is that your workload switches from lots of tenure-qualifying stuff to lots of administrative stuff. As his other point highlights, you still have an unreasonable workload, it's just that now you aren't directly fighting for your job. You can slack off, meaning do a mediocre job at the many, many tasks assigned to you.

And that goes to problem #3, especially the impossibility of teaching well when a huge load of administrative BS is required and great teaching isn't required.
They have publicly said that they want to keep the standard library small, and swift-corelibs-foundation is available and open-source.
>I don't think anyone would advocate a structure in which they themselves would be less valued than they are currently, that's for sure.

Except if they genuinely believe in equality and hate being above/managing other people, but rather be equal part of a team, even if that means losing their managing privileges...

It's not like there are no people who didn't dislike management and wanted (and some did) get back to plain programmer.
Came here to say that, fellow introvert.
Most Americans hate doing math, do not read for pleasure, and rarely write outside of work.

But even you don't deny that they can. For some reason you seem to think that teaching those things is trivial or easy.
I think the RSA algorithm is fascinating, just because of the impact it has had on the industry. Imagine a world without public-key encryption. Crazy right? (Obviously there would be other ways to achieve public-key encryption if RSA had never come along... but you get my point).

While we're on the subject: This book is a great read: http://www.amazon.com/Nine-Algorithms-That-Changed-Future/dp...
> Adversity is what gives life meaning, improves us as people, and (paradoxically) creates happiness

And one must imagine sisyphus to be happy?

I suspect, the attacks is what gets boring. Attacks that you need to fend off which have only an impact on your imagined legacy, not your present state of existence.

Fighting something you should be ignoring (rather, can ignore without consequence to your next day) is just soul crushing.

It's the same sort of reaction to writing a random comment and reading the responses, most of which do not deserve a response from you - but it's so hard to let it go and live your life when someone's being wrong on the internet.

That is an adversity without meaning - experience being willfully misunderstood by people. I would imagine it would dull me, if I forced myself to explain my mind ad nauseam.
Yup, lots of temporaries (I haven't written much Clojure recently, so I'm sure I'm missing lots of simplifying core fns).

(let [; input
js (cheshire.core/parse-string (slurp (clojure.java.io/resource "awful.json")))
; utils
get-match (fn [k v coll] (first (filter #(= (get % k) v) coll)))
model-for (fn [title toplevel] (get-match "title" title (toplevel "models")))
key-for (fn [name* model] ((get-match "name" name* (model "fields")) "key"))
; models
fruit-model (model-for "fruits" js)
farmer-model (model-for "farmers" js)
; keys
fruit-name-key (key-for "Name" fruit-model)
farmer-name-key (key-for "Full name" farmer-model)
farmer-fruits-key (key-for "Fruits" farmer-model)
; values
bob-entity (get-match farmer-name-key "Bob, the farmer" (farmer-model "entities"))
bob-fruit-keys (bob-entity farmer-fruits-key)
bob-fruit-entities (map #(get-match "_id" % (fruit-model "entities")) bob-fruit-keys)
bob-fruit-names (map #(% fruit-name-key) bob-fruit-entities)]
bob-fruit-names)

=> ("Orange")
Philosophy of mind and consciousness are just fields within the overarching study. They're commonly brought up as "typical" pursuits in philosophy (there's really no such thing), but they aren't an embodiment.

Automobiles might have been bad for horses, but it didn't make cows less useful.

(FWIW, philosophy studies aren't limited to works of philosophy. I've read Haidt and Holder for both moral and political philosophy.)
Not sure why you're being downvoted. I am running one of those companies. Calling it structureless is as misleading as calling agile chaotic.

The "Green" stage can feel a little like the tyranny this article describes, but the "Teal" stage is anything but. It's comparatively light on arbitrary rules compared to your traditional top down company, but it's certainly not unstructured.

I have written a numbe of articles on this topic at http://danieltenner.com/open-cultures/ in case you want to read more.
Robin Dunbar's related book:

http://amzn.com/0571253423
A number of people in this thread are saying the answer is either to prescribe opiates, or to leave people in pain.

People who need opiates should be able to get them, but that's a small number of people. Giving opiates to the rest does very little to treat their pain, and leaves them with an opiate addiction.

Most people with long term pain don't need better access to opiates. They need better access to pain clinics with the range of meds and physical therapies they have. (And yes, opiates if those are needed.)
EVs have a range problem. 250 miles is fine for day to day driving, but most Americans routinely need to travel farther than that. Travel to nearby major cities, visiting relatives, vacations, etc. The supercharger network is a long way from being about to support travel for most people, and even once it is the charge time (30 minutes for 170 miles range) is a significant inconvenience on any trip long enough to require recharging.

The bottom line is that even if an EV meets your daily needs, it isn't going to be good enough to be your only car. That really isn't going to be the case until EVs regularly have a 350-400 mile range, the supercharger network is reasonably dense, and a supercharger can top off your car in 10-15 minutes, tops.
Funny that in the nearby Tesla thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11650967
people avoid getting killed because of the empty nose...
Ok, we changed to that from http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/tyrstruct.html.
In Colorado they don't.
GPLv3 is still not clearly superior to GPLv2. GPLv3 is only superior if you agree with the new restrictions added in GPLv3, but again, not everybody does. And you know damn well that this is purely opinion, because you already referenced Linus Torvalds's stance on this matter.

There's two issues at play with copyleft licenses. The first is making the source available to others, and the second is allowing others to install modified versions of the software. GPLv3 mandates both. GPLv2 was certainly intended to mandate both, but ends up mostly just mandating the first. If all you care about is having other people who use your software release the source to their modified versions, then GPLv2 is clearly superior to GPLv3 because it has fewer restrictions. Similarly, if you care about having source made available but you also want to have your software become as popular as possible, you may opt for GPLv2 because it's a lot more likely for companies to use your software than if it's GPLv3.
Well if you're up for nitpicking, I wouldn't be surprised if you're able to find 30 problems in my comment rather than 3.

I urge you to read it while practising the principle of charity.
Fucking authoritarians. I really do not have much else to say, I can not have a reasonable conversation with people that believe the government should control everything.. Including what the fuck I eat and tax (aka Punish me if I make the "wrong" choice by their standards

you basically want to live in a world like this

https://www.aclu.org/ordering-pizza
Illma Gore: 'If anyone is going to be threatened by a small , it's Trump'
that sounds like a great way to learn how to drive
How does it work. I just looked up some pictures and it just looks like fabric. Seems like it would be more slippery.
Seems not too bad in St Paul, though to the west looks not great.

https://weather.com/safety/wildfires/news/fort-mcmurray-wild...
Medical devices are used by humans. Humans, for some reason prefer and know Windows better. Why shouldn't the devices use Windows?

Today, doctors from a hospital the other side of the country can diagnose your cancer realtime while you are still in the MRI machine, and they do it with Windows, because that's what humans know and use.
It seems wrong to even say the treatment works - of course it appears to when you drug someone's concerns away but it doesn't seem to change the underlying wrongness of the sensations.

If I broke my leg I'm sure I'd appreciate an Ativan but I'd really need a splint.
When I first saw this article I thought they were talking about bitcoin.
Wait, so in the meantime it is? I had always assumed crowdfunded projects had a fairly clear buyer beware aspect to them.
I assume you're talking about https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11651039, which was flagged by users. However, since you don't seem to want to use the site as intended, we've banned your account.
Here's a rebuttal to the original piece, The Tyranny of Tyranny: https://libcom.org/library/tyranny-of-tyranny-cathy-levine
I'm skeptical that it makes a huge difference. After all, US employers are pretty cautious about giving real information when contacted - the questions may be legal, but you can still get sued over the answers. Most of the "real" information in either setting flows informally.

It can't help, but it's hard to imagine that's anywhere near the top of France's legislative issues.
> innovative technology companies that have promising products, real revenue and strong visions.

How many of today's startups does that describe? Like 1 in 50, maybe? The past three years have felt an awful lot like the late 90s, and I think the next three are going to be a lot like the early 2000s.
Handy tools and sites for Startups
The example about Uber as truly "getting" the power of cross-platform distributed bots in the US is spot on.
Except you probably can give up management if you really want to, but you'll probably have to take a pay cut. Which is kind of the OP's point.

It's not that you want to be less valued as a manager, it's that you want to be more valued as a programmer.
No, if this was an accident then many people were criminally negligent.

Start prosecuting them for failing to ask the right questions and see if they start implicating others to save themselves. (ie, normal prosecutorial procedure.)
Oh wow, I never realized that. Yes, I do believe you're right!