skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If they were overly-dependent on SEO... their Alexa rank sure seems to have fallen a lot since the middle of 2015.
App for Sexual Relations
App that allows you to track, record and consent sexual relations. Download the app at www.zapcent.com
Maybe I'm just slow, but their chart seems perfectly ambiguous to me. I can't figure out whether "red X" means "it's bad", or "green check" means "we successfully hacked it".
Congratulations to -Elizabeth, Matt and Sam.

It's wonderful somebody is taking something out of the economics textbook and into reality.

Success or failure, this is the right thing to do.
What you quoted is not the author's point at all. He goes on to say it's an overreaction to the previous belief in "logic" marriages.
[llvm-dev] GitHub anyone?
> As a developer, I feel like I have more control over mitigating CSRF then XSS.

Your feeling is correct. Let me put it this way:

You mitigate SQL injection effectively by making sure no data (user input) can affect the code (SQL query). i.e. Prepared statements.

There is no analogous equivalent for defeating XSS. You have to escape output.

https://paragonie.com/blog/2015/06/preventing-xss-vulnerabil...

Escaping input for SQL injection "works", but has failed pretty hard in the past:

http://stackoverflow.com/a/12118602/2224584

(Character encoding, for the lose.)

By comparison, CSRF is trivial. You use a token that only the client should know, and implement a trivial challenge/response authentication layer onto your HTTP POST APIs, make sure you're using TLS, and call it a day.
That this is a solipsistic, melodramatic and, ultimately, immature analysis of marriage.
Of course, you should not marry or have kids - that way you will be better separated, an easier to tame slave. Thanks for not having relationships, thanks for not having people who stand up for you!
I don't understand the effort here. Making an image implies supporting it; does the author really think it's going to be worth his time to "support" what is surely a couple of bash scripts wrapped up in 600MB of OS?

It seems like a simple how-to blog post would have been more appropriate.
>> They seem like a ripe target for political abuse.

What? It is already is in several places around the world.
You capitalize "truth" in other comments and say we should seek it yet you don't realize this endeavor is also prone to the is-ought problem. Because man seeks truth, does that mean he should morally seek it? The principle you adhere to destroys itself with even the faintest intellectual rigor. The more you try to make logic of illogic, religion, the more it waters down your version of truth. It happened to me also. What I then believed as a Christian became so watered down that it was far and away anything resembling Christianity.

>>Materialism cannot point to a source of objective moral values. Period.

Yes, it can. Whatever the material is derived from, it's chained to a more objective link. So yes, you can use relative morality to argue that it, in itself, has objectivity. For example, someone higher in rank says Saturday is a day off yet he gives the order to his inferior that he can then order that Saturday can be either. You have relative order coming from objective order.

>>In my opinion, based on your given conceptions of metaethics, rather than dismiss this avenue of inquiry with the reasoning "it made some sort of logical sense [but not enough]" you could likely have explored the concept further.

Ah, the old 'because you don't believe, you haven't been spending enough decades of your life exploring the religion I want you to believe in'. Meanwhile, hundreds of other religious people want me to explore their hundreds of gods and hundreds of interpretations through hundreds of years of philosophical wankery. I just could as well say you haven't explored atheism enough and that's why you haven't arrived to it.
I'm not familiar with academia but I was surprised that the discovery was made by three mathematicians at three different far flung universities. Is that type of collaboration also being accelerated by the internet?
Not one mention of Switzerland? Possibly a larger scale study soon. Voting June 5th.

http://www.basicincome2016.org/
I think it works. The 'problem' 50onRed is 'solving' is not an intriguing or compelling one.
Twitter suspends DarthPutinKGB account mocking Vladimir Putin
Yes, it's better. Condensed: the distinction he's making is between losing your root password and losing a shell running at uid 0.
Could you elaborate? What is solipsistic or even melodramatic about it?
The former; red X means it's bad.
The study cited by that CNBC article is not the PNHP study criticized by McCardle [0], although its bankruptcy numbers are derived from it (it also uses numbers from the CDC and the Commonwealth Fund). I encourage you take a look at the original press release [1] (also linked to in the CNBC article), which has any number of other damning statistics besides the bankruptcy numbers that you and McCardle take issue with.

Without getting into it here, I don't think McCardle's "debunking" is very persuasive, but you're right that the PNHP study (and thus at least the bankruptcy numbers in the NerdWallet Health report) has serious problems; I hadn't read it, and just as you point out, the PNHP authors conflate numbers to get them as high as possible: around 62%, whereas "when asked about problems that contributed very much or somewhat to their bankruptcy [...] 54.9%
cited medical or drug costs". But while 54.9% is lower, it's...not a whole lot lower. Even if the numbers were halved, say, by taking the 29% of people who wholly attributed their bankruptcy to their own medical bills (not their family's), that's nowhere near an order of magnitude different: a million people going through bankruptcy due to medical bills is better than two million but is just as disgraceful, and simply not going to happen in countries with socialized medicine...so I think my original point still stands.

[0] http://www.pnhp.org/new_bankruptcy_study/Bankruptcy-2009.pdf

[1] https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/health/managing-medical-bill...
Because you and I are likely to become useless. If we are not capital owners, who do not have the means to survive exclusively off the value of our assets, then we will become useless to the economy in this century.

We already do not send people to prison for unpaid debts. And it is not a genocide we could easily see through - the unemployable, a number growing daily through automation, will not just sit down and die, but likely burn all of society down around with them if abandoned by said society.

This isn't some isolated fragment of the population. This decade, its going to be 11 million US citizens associated with the trucking and transport industries. In the decade following, service jobs, office jobs, actuarial, law, and medical jobs will all be going to AI neural nets and robotics with realized vision. And if we ignore how they contributed to the economic engine that produced such abundance, and let them starve while the owners of the means of production reap near infinite supply, that would realize our current extinction event to its fullest.
> If the inverse was true then entire fields of Mathematics would have collapsed.

Honest question: what would've been the consequences of this?
> One of my fears with UBI is that I am hearing ideas posited that men will no longer be made responsible for things like child support or alimony because, hey, the woman gets a check anyway. And I think this is incredibly, seriously problematic.

Both child support and alimony are not flat basic-necessity calculations, but are income based. The availability of a UBI doesn't change the fundamental premises on which those are built, or even make any significant impact on the formulas -- under the assumption that a UBI paid to the adults would be counted as each adult's income, and UBI paid for the child to the custodial parent(s) would be treated as joint income when the parents are together and income solely of the custodial parent in the formulas after a split, there would be no need to even touch existing formulas.
I didn't downvote, but if I had, it wouldn't be for that reason. It would be because having kids or not having kids is something many people speak of cavalierly as if it is totally in our control and this is often not true. If birth control fails, there are places where abortion is hard to come by (including large parts of the U.S., from what I gather). These attitudes disproportionately negatively impact women.

Much of human sexual morality is rooted in the thorny issue that mother nature makes sex pleasurable in large part to get you to reproduce and efforts to enjoy sex without it leading to babies are often unsuccessful. So, we have a long human tradition of things like shotgun weddings.
the term 'function' refers to a true function, no side effects. So, when I say "FP", that's what I mean.

>so I'd actually disagree and say that your Scala code isn't FP, since it emphasizes transformations on an object.

What I wrote is no different than

change(oldData) |> map(x => x+1) |> filter(x => isTrue(x)

Often the '.' style in scala is literally syntactic sugar that will get rewritten to pass the data to a stand alone function.
"enemies foreign and domestic"
Ruby (on Rails) ecosystem bittersweet or “we like to hate PHP”
Indeed it does. You could talk about Windows the entire operating system, or you could talk about Windows as Win32, but either way - yes - they both have 260 character path length limits _by default_.

I realize that you're saying that Win32 doesn't have a hard limit of MAX_PATH since you can use Win32 file namespace paths (the `\\?\` prefix) to specify long paths. And yes, that's technically correct, you can. But realistically, unless you carefully control the paths that you're writing and no other program is using them, you're pretty much shooting yourself in the foot by trying to do that.

This is because most apps simply use the Win32 APIs with normal paths and not Win32 file namespace paths. So sure - you can write a file that has a name that's 1024 characters, or a file named `CON`, or a file named `hello?`, but only other programs that wisely use `\\?\` paths can do anything with that. Which is basically nothing except the program you just wrote.

It certainly doesn't include almost anything that Windows itself put down during installation. `cmd`, the Windows Shell, the whole of the CLR? None of these can read the file you just wrote.

So the title seems quite accurate to me.
https://pinboard.in - an awesome bookmarking service
I think that there are two extremely harmful narratives that have reached wide acceptance in the last few generations:

1) There's a soulmate out there for you

2) You shouldn't change who you are for your partner

Both of which combine to create the barrage of unhappy relationship stories that you hear today. Really, I think that you can be happy with just about anyone who is willing to listen to you and change their mind when they're wrong.

Because you are wrong about something. Maybe it's major, maybe it's minor, maybe it's a "facet of your personality" which is destructive, and you should be willing to update the way that you interact with the world based on new information. Going into relationships as an immutable person is a quick way to dwindle your dating pool down to practically nothing or decrease the quality of the relationship for your partner.
Unless you don't mind people using your money for alcohol or drugs.

Not being flippant; there's a reason this sign exists:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/86/70/85/86708570f...

and many more alike.
As a grad student in math I read a lot of lifeless papers. Seeing the exact opposite is fun. I thought it was a good article. Why does math need to avoid breathlessness if we seem to embrace it with, say, a million breathless articles about Stephen Curry's latest game? It only seems bad because there's not a culture of excitement over math like there is for basketball, so it stands out. But if we want there to be such a culture, maybe we need to start by taking every bit of excitement we have and stretching it to the fullest.
I don't think the author is arguing against having children. He seems to be arguing against a passion-driven, romantic ideal of what a relationship is which doesn't account for noisy children and which usually ends in deep disappointment. He seems to be arguing for a more pragmatic view (he calls it "pessimistic") which may enable us to get more out of our actual, non-idealized relationships.
I read your "personally" sentence and immediately thought "this person has not lived in chicagoland where purposeful manipulation of such a system has famously been an artform".
The best solution I can think of to counter people blowing all their money is to trickle the money to an account, instead of giving it to them as a single fat paycheck every month. So if instead of giving them $1500/30days, give them $50 a day or maybe $25/day and a $750 "rent stipend" bulk at the end, so that they can't blow more than a certain amount a day unless they've been actively saving. This encourages the behavior of saving which is the biggest missing skill for the poor (because they are not used to having anything to save).

As for what happens when that gets blown out because of an emergency, I think addressing the cost of health care in a place like America is an independent and arguably more important challenge than providing BI. The system built around insurance policies and over-priced hospital procedures is ridiculous to say the least. You shouldn't need insurance to afford simple checkups, prescriptions and treatment, which would prevent most overcomplicated health conditions for the financially constrained.

Every other financial emergency I believe can be responded to with "tough shit you've exhausted your social safety nets," and it's probably ok. BI won't solve everything (or even anything) magically overnight, the intent is to build a culture long-term where people manage their lives around it and don't have to be told "tough shit" from birth.
Depends on your expat crowd and reason. The british expats to NYC and SF are usually educated H1B immigrant types and are very pleasant people.

The expat who goes to south east asia to retire on their blue collar pension might be a different kind of person.
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2016/05/arnold_kling_on_1.h...

Arnold Kling's opined on this point (the particular distortion of the US political process) in his interview with Russ Roberts on the EconTalk podcast:

Kling: Well, let me make another point before I get back to that. Which is a point I also make in the book. Which is that, it isn't that the political process kind of just makes random errors. I think it actually makes very systematic errors. What it does is it always seems to work in the direction of subsidizing demand for something and restricting supply for that same thing.
It's not at all a forgotten option, it's just not one that the majority choose to take. There's nothing wrong with deciding to have kids. We're not running out of people, but we're not over-crowded and population growth is slowing in many places. There are certain geographic areas with more dire situations, but the whole isn't looking bad.

As far as their comment in particular:

> So don't have kids, we're not running out of people after all.

This adds zero to the conversation. It's like saying "You might get hit by a bus if you try to cross the street, so don't do it at all".

In truth, deciding whether to have kids is a much more complicated process than that. There's no "So just do X" or "So don't do X" advice that is helpful or constructive.
This is a good comparsion. :)
Especially when sometimes this is being forced by a group of people who seem to be professional complainers. First they cut out 10% of the users for this violation, then another 10% of the smaller group for that violation, then another 10% of the new smaller group for another violation, and so on and so on. Eventually you're just left with the complainers, who'll just move onto another platform to start over with the complaining.
It is actually true. When you pick someone, what you are really doing is picking a set of problems that you want to live with, not a set of happiness that you want to live with it.

Happiness comes and goes. Problems and being able to deal with them always stay.
Thiel Apologists Still Having a Hard Time
Is it true you'll clear 2x as much post-tax salary in SV as compared to Phoenix?
Hah, I didn't expect my implied criticism (elsewhere in this thread) of a Yahoo VP being hired as their CEO to be so damningly validated by personal experience.
No, people don't like solutions which ignore the problem.

Yes, by completely changing your plan for your life you can prevent certain problems, but that doesn't necessitate that you should make the change.
They were acquired ...by the bank.
There needs to be some sort of action, though. Pondering all the possible effects has been going on for some time now, and simulating a perfectly spherical BI in a vacuum is not going to be any more useful than a 'fundamentally flawed' empirical experiment.

>What kind of science is this?

It's the normal scientific method. They have a hypothesis. They're going to test it in the real world. And the results will be analyzed. What's the alternative? If the pilot doesn't go well, and they take the same approach again, that'd be the very definition of insane.
If only people without an income qualify, then it is not Basic Income. Basic Income is received by everyone without any means test. The purpose is to avoid perverse incentives in which people on welfare see little value in getting a job.
I think a testament to the quality of SQLite is its flexibility. I was given the task of building a distributed, HA databases that ran without human intervention. I was able to adapt SQLite to run on a different storage backend in the area of days as opposed to the weeks or more it would take with another system.

In addition to this, I was even able to port SQLite to the Linux kernel: https://github.com/sargun/ksqlite -- and IMHO, it's really neat that in <1000 lines of code I could adapt this database to run in kernel space.
Pay daily instead of monthly. This way it is harder to "blow all their money" and not being able to afford food. Or a hybrid approach: 50% of the monthly income upfront and the other 50% distributed daily.
And the other 20% is learned based on past circumstances.
Nothing to be sorry about: a lot of HN readers (invluding me) are seeing it for the first time. And I will upvote this next time I see it, too.
Sorry to be the one to point this out, but we're already there.
No warrant needed to obtain location data held by cellphone carriers
Absolutely, but the answer to that problem shouldn't really be to use it unlicensed, even if it's 'only' nagware rather than a trial. There are many free alternatives that do the same job very well.
Your link is in Swedish? I assume that they're not talking about US statistics in it. Different cultures are going to have different cultural barriers to jobs; there will be some overlap, but it's not going to be the same. In India, for instance, there are almost equal numbers of women and men in IT-related fields. There are other issues there, but that's one of the starkest examples I know of.

There's a great US document here [1] that details a lot of the problem, at least here in the US. Nearly half of STEM occupations are computer related, and that's where women have some of the hardest time getting jobs (only 26.6% female). Another 32 percent are engineering occupations, where the numbers are even worse (only 13.2% female).

Many of the jobs you listed aren't dominated by one gender; in your list, except for "nurse", most either are low paying or don't post a significant barrier to entry to men.

More women want to be veterinarians? Good for them! I can't imagine being a male vet would encounter any cultural biases that would interfere with his ability to be comfortable in the job, so it's not equivalent. The word "veterinarian" or "vet" doesn't have a gender connotation for me (unlike "nurse", for instance), and while there may be more women at vet conferences than men, I don't see how that's a problem for them? Unless they're concerned about their perceived masculinity or something idiotic like that.

I personally had no inclination at all to go into a medical or legal career; if I'd been born female, would it be OK for me to have been coerced into taking a lower-paying job, menial or otherwise, because of the harassment and bias present in STEM jobs?

Computer-related jobs aren't the only option, but those are typically the options that are most accessible, in that they don't require a multi-year degree and professional certification. And yet computer related jobs are increasingly dominated by men for no valid reason; many of the jobs you enumerated are dominated by women because those are they jobs they can get.

And if a woman does want to drive a truck or operate heavy machinery, that should be OK too. If that means that the guys need to not post centerfolds all over the office, or make derogatory jokes about women, so be it. Any hiring restrictions should be based purely on actual physical needs ("must be able to lift 70lbs." for instance).

If you replace "Political Correctness" with "Treating Others With Respect," you get a better concept of what it is that matters about being "PC".

Citing examples of professions that have a lot of women means nothing when the discussion is about specific domains (STEM in particular) that frequently exclude, or at least are not welcoming to, women.

[1] http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acs-24.pdf
Consider: a world where everyone is entitled to a basic income (and hopefully also guaranteed healthcare) has a lot to offer for libertarians:

Fewer desperate people means you have the liberty to walk streets at night without the fear of being mugged. You are less likely to be panhandled by homeless people missing body parts because they couldn't afford their medical bills. Assuming BI suffices for the myriad of society's problems and replaces government solutions, it is an effective way to contain the state's scope and ambitions, since any "deserved" welfare scheme rests on the ideas that there are "correct" ways to live and "incorrect" ways that require welfare to fix. Basic income does away with that idea by providing what people need as the basis for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, while not mandating a particular way to live (such as drug testing for food stamps or work/-searching requirements for the unemployed who would be shown the door if they preferred to live as an unpaid community volunteer). This is why BI is often attributed as a conservative idea.
"sites like this" = Medium.com sub-brands. I don’t know why Medium chooses to do that. I dislike it, too.
> I'd hope the system would absolutely tell them "tough shit"

So the more vulnerable you are, the more likely the system should fail? A critical system is poorly designed when it is more likely to fail when its function becomes more critical.

Most people don't have problems because they are lazy, but because they have serious problems. Consider people with mental health issues, costly diseases (e.g., alcoholism), disabilities, people who are old and not functioning well, etc. If an elderly person is scammed out of their money, I don't feel 'tough shit' is a good response.
Go Is Not Good – Curated Complaints about Golang
As i see, Indeed has better scrapers and SEO for a start. It established itself as a market leader in this business, also built simple products like letting companies directly post jobs, making it easy to apply from mobile(they acquired mobolt for this) and also working on Indeed Premium( a hired clone). With that kind of traffic, if simplyhired had launched any decent products to help recruiters, they would have easily been counting a lot of $$$$. A stale product is the reason for its death.
Considering it runs on electrons, you could even consider it a digital one if you wanted to.