skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a really sloppy article - and I and many others disagree with your premise. You don't have to put this much money at risk to innovate, and failures like this have the potential to set the space back years (regulation may increase, consumers will be very wary).

Nearly every engineer who launches a product goes through a staged rollout with testing along the way (including the Ethereum network which took years to develop and test, and likely still has many undiscovered bugs). When the costs of failure are high (any financial services product, software at NASA, embedded software), this is especially important. DAO innovation could have been served by draft contracts passed around in the community, or a small POC with small deposits or toy money, as the design was worked out - and refined over months, and yes, even years.

Releasing a DAO contract (and marketing it, curating it), without any limitations on funding or substantial due diligence, was problematic at best - and gives a black eye to everyone who exercises due diligence in the space.
Maybe because except for the 1% most of the population feels the negative effects of it? Doesn't take a genius to see how broken the system is
If that were the only problem, we could rectify it by explicitly enumerating those rules in the contract. However, it unquestionably lowers the utility of contracts if they are forced to have certain terms (explicit or implicit) included.
It has nothing to do with array language, R is vectorized and is slightly more legible than, say clojure, that is not array lang. It has to do with very high density, though.
The core question is whether these are applied uniformly. In the specific case at hand, only the woman's gender was emphasized. We're the questioner to have identified everyone prefixed by their gender, it would have seemed weird, but not biased per se.

There's also a question of whether it's contextually relevant. In this case, the question had everything to do with her CFO-ness and nothing to do with her gender. In a different context, it might have made sense to direct a question to someone on the board specifically because of their gender or race. But this wasn't such a context.
So, uh, yeah, i'm a googler, met a lot of them :)

"I'd argue that while perhaps 1-2% of those donors may be interacting with those politicians directly, that 1-2%, being founders, chairmen, SVPs, etc. are probably the lion's share of the actual money donated, given their higher compensation."

This simply does not jive in any way with the amounts listed on opensecrets. You don't have to argue, either, the data is right there, and it does not support this claim.

"Anna Eshoo is an excellent example of a paid Google representative: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=201....
Here's one example: (Lofgren is paid by Google as well.) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/19/anna-eshoo-zoe-lofg...

Both of these are literally the representatives for Google's district, and more importantly, tens of thousands of Google employee's district.

They are supposed to be representing what their constituents want, including Google, and Google employees.

Let's ignore that though.
Your claim, that they are a mainly "paid google represenatives" is not even supported by the data you cite:

"Raised: $1,509,756"

"Donations from Google Inc
Total: $34,550
Employees: $24,550
PAC: $10,000"

That's 2.4%. So your claim that this is a representative paid for and bought, because Google employees donated 1.7% of their total campaign take, and the Google company PAC donated 0.7%?

This is pretty laughable.

Even worse for your argument, literally the line below it shows that Stanford employees donated more to her campaign than Google employees.

"Stanford University:
Total: $25,200
Employees: $25,200
"
Stanford has 1/5th the number of employees as Google!

So by your logic, i'm guessing she's bought and paid for by Stanford, by a factor of 5 more than she's bought and paid for by Google?
I program in J and there are many books, examples, YouTube videos, a great help file, and several active forums. Just check jsoftware.com.

Rosettacode is also a good source for example J code [1].

The J for C Programmers book is good if you already have programming experience, especially in C [2].

[1] http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category:J

[2] http://www.jsoftware.com/help/jforc/contents.htm
How is it not an issue? My ability to pay should not rely on my phone's OS and payment app functioning correctly. It should not rely on me having remembered to charge my phone. All of these phone payment systems go through the credit card companies anyway. Printing out the plastic card is not the main service they provide.
The 2015 book <i>Prehension: The Hand and the Emergence of Humanity</i> (MIT Press)by the noted philosopher Colin McGinn argues that the freeing of the hand through bipedal locomotion lead to language and the great explosion in intelligence that produced <i>homo sapien</i>
> dodgy

I really wish Americans said this word more frequently. It accurately describes so many things, it's a shame we don't.
What actually matters is perception of "integrity, work ethic, and a knack for getting along", because people can only make decisions based on their perceptions. Many* assert that the 1950s was a time when people widely believed that Negroes were shiftless, Queers were deviant, and women were hysterical. If you believe this, then it is natural to conclude that a Black man needed to be twice as hardworking in order to overcome the priors of those around him.

* including myself and pretty much everyone I know.
Part of the problem is inserting the same standard across multiple roles; for example, mandating all managers have a college education.

You don't need a college degree for most sales, customer service, and operations roles. Some of the best people managers and sales people I've met have sketchy degrees (or none at all).

On the other hand, putting someone in charge of a process which is highly reliant on statistics or technology who doesn't have a college degree (or real world experience which proves ample ability) can be a total disaster. I've seen what happens when you take a non-statistical director and put them over a data science process.... they hide in familiar details (project plan! communications!) and can't understand the harder decisions involved in the role. Like does the magical black-box system even work....
Or their other options are ripe for disruption
Darn, I thought that would produce italics.
What mechanism would you suggest otherwise?

For example, suppose I ask a question, and within 10 minutes get an answer which is good enough for me, then I accept it and move on.

Hours later, someone gives a much better answer. What is my obligation to track the topic after I already know a correct answer? What should be the mechanism to override my acceptance?

What is more achievable: putting that mechanism in place, or getting beginning programmers to look at the first answer rather than looking for the accepted one?

To which I'll add, I'm looking at it in privacy mode (not logged in), and can't tell which is accepted. Is that something that only people with an account can see? If so, aren't those also people who are now no longer beginner SO users?
So you're asking what if a customer signs a contract with hidden fatally exploitable flaws, but that is the reason why they signed it? It's a nonsensical scenario. The general investor population does not intend to enter into such contracts, and that is who contract law seeks to protect.
I see this as the end game to pretty much all these companies that claim to enable the 'sharing economy'. Why share 20% of your profits with Uber when you can share them with yourself?
Indeed, it does unquestionably lower the utility of contracts that each individual contract does not have the ability to create for itself its own entire public policy and jurisprudence. We've generally decided contracts shouldn't have that much utility.
Reading and Writing Data from Files – C++ Better Explained
Perhaps .mil and .gov will quickly scan the rest of
their systems for the same set of vulnerabilities,
but I fear it is more likely that they will spend
months in the RFP and contract process, and get around
to scanning systems for the same set of vulnerabilities
1 or 2 fiscal years from now.
By a Honest Ponzi scheme I mean someone comes to you with a contract, and is not trying to be deceptive, is not trying to lie, doesn't have misleading marketing materials. He writes in Font size 36 : "This is a Ponzi scheme, it works the following way : [...]. You agree with all the risks involved when giving the money". This would work if this was Ponzi Scheme, or a Roulette game actually[.].

When you sign, there is a notarial act, and a video of you shaking hand and saying out loud that you understand this is a Ponzi scheme and you might end up loosing all your money, there is also some drug tests performed to make sure you are not under the influence of any drug, and some psychiatric evaluation to make sure you are not disabled in any way.

[.] Another thought slightly off topic: can I sue a Las Vegas casino because I put $100k on Red but the ball ended on Black and I lost everything? They even facilitate drugging me with C2H6O!
I don't think it will ever be ok to be a pedophile which unfortunately you seem to imply it should be ok. Even back then lots of people knew slavery was wrong but could not do much about.
It is not impossible in this market, just very hard. The key is getting your cost of customer acquisition down below your lifetime customer value. You can do this two ways - use a low touch sales model or offer a sticky product with high margins at a relatively high price.

The problem is not many products can be sold successfully into the SMB market with a low touch sales model - the decision makers are just too busy running their businesses to investigate what technology products will make their life easier on their own (hence the need for sales staff).

Once you need sales staff you need a product that is going to give you a high lifetime customer value and there are not many technology products aimed at the SMB market that can offer this. I sell into SMB market, but I sell a very expensive SAAS product in a tiny niche. This makes a great lifestyle business, but it has no interest to investors because the total market size is just too small.
So basically nothing good ever happened before NOW because people held views you disagree with today.
That's true, but I keep an up-to-date entry for each of my servers in my ~/.ssh/config anyway. Some of them don't even have hostnames; they only have IPs. I can't imagine having to remember that.
Your comment adds nothing of worth to the discussion. So what if you don't see any problems with meritocracy? Explain why you feel that way.
If you think an asset is worth $x and it drops below that amount for a while. That's a benefit isn't it? You get to invest more at a lower price. When the asset returns to its true value you now have more of it.
Or in the wrong school. Which of unfortunately causes a revenge of the nerds syndrome.
Still no linux version for GOG galaxy though.
Really? It costs $500 to replace a credit card?
Exactly. People see the few companies that manage to succeed in this market and assume it is easier than it really is - the few survivors hide the thousands of companies that tried and failed.
Steven Pinker wrote about the distribution you mention in 2002 in the "Blank Slate". I'd highly recommend it to anyone who's interested in neuroscience and assumptions about human nature that underly political discourse in this country.

It's remarkably relevant even though it's over a decade old
That's true, but the courts should make decisions based on what is legal currently. And unfortunately the Constitution doesn't give any right to privacy. Only a right to not have yourself or your possessions be subject to unreasonable physical searches by the government.
Capitalism see labor as a cost, and though outsourcing, overseaing, and automation attempts to drive that cost to as close to zero as possible. The fundamental problem is that people derive great benefit and satisfaction from their labor, their participation in production, and the knowledge of a job well done. Capitalism, over a long time, will always deny people that satisfaction. Young people can feel that truth in their everyday. It's Capitalism's fundamental, and intrinsic flaw. Work matters, and it is not a cost, it is a benefit.
Another one of these posts? When will they end.

"We shut down our startup"

Thanks for letting us know.
An absolute genius who probably pushed the art of the guitar ahead by two generations.
My first knee jerk argument was 'no true scotsman' capitalist edition, but that got me thinking.

Capitalism is basically markets on a large scale, and some form of market will exist as long as a single person has opportunity costs and performs some sort of optimization. Markets will always be with us in some form. How could we even go about opting out? Being dissatisfied with capitalism as a concept seems like being dissatisfied with gravity.
>TheDAO has after all, captured a significant amount of momentum, interest and capital.

So did Bernie Madoff.
A novel proposal for the exchanges that object to IEX: let the market decide.
> it is not a cost, it is a benefit

This has a pretty strong diminishing returns effect.
this. when i evolved from the procedural mess that were tutorials and books, even, i watched most other programmers and/or collegues staying behind.
embedded php worked for them. little bit js here, css there... up to this day people just don't evolve from php.

and then there's the other extreme. the overly scientific who brings all sorts of crap into the language or the frameworks. it's justsuch a shit show.
Well, if someone says "the CFO", many people will automatically assume the CFO in question is male. The gender may be emphasized to avoid that assumption.

The article, as it is written, doesn't do a very good job of presenting the context. Without additional context, I very much doubt the investor was trying to be sexist or offensive with their statement, and I don't think they deserve such a backlash. It's picking at straws. The investor is human, too. There are better targets.
> knack for getting along

we dont think a black man can get along here.
You can use asterisks to start/stop italics
Yes but that was after ETH went up 50% in a week, and that prompts a lot of people to short anyway.
http://on.wsj.com/1W4tA5K
Try a keyboard that can be "tented" to the natural position of your hands, http://www.goldtouch.com/ergonomic-keyboards/
That's a huge improvement over where we were a few years ago, when Steve Jobs died and I noted all the human misery and pain he caused with his employment of Foxconn sweatshops.

My coworker said Jobs' life was worth more than those factory workers. I reminded him that everyone has equal worth and he seemed stunned at my forceful response. Noting that your life has to feel pretty hopeless to jump out the window of the factory you work/live in.

I guess being a do-well white boy in Chicago afforded him quite the luxury of deciding the world pecking order. Except I was also a white boy in Chicago calling him out on it. Considering we had multiple 2nd generation immigrant coworkers around us, who should in theory empathize with 3rd world work conditions, I was the only one who spoke up.

Probably because the Steve Jobs > all guy was a fairly influential architect. But almost nothing stops me from piping up anyway. Still, judging human worth over intelligence is definitely a bit better than judging based on entrepreneurial capacity as my colleague was.

Maybe in a couple more years we'll all agree that humanity has equal worth and dignity. Then all life, and we'll be set.
American society worships financial success and the mythology of supermen and superwomen to the exclusion of nearly everything else and this extracts a huge price in the individual and social sense of well being.

Since capitalism will rarely allow more than 20-30% 'success' that leaves a huge percentage of your population feeling inadequate.

Sometimes it feels the focus on individual brilliance without context of social value impoverishes rather than nourishes.

It can induce an adversorial state of hyper competition, in and out groups and a heightening state of frenzy to belong that leaves little room for niceties like empathy and community.

The folklore of America's success reinforces the mythology of individual brilliance, but rational heads need to question without taking away from individual brilliance in the past, now or the neccessity of it in the future, the benefits of the colononization of an entire continent.

The downside to this single minded focus is the simple fact that individuals are disempowered. They cannot effect any change. It takes real community and society to effect even the smallest change and that requires a functioning social setup with community, cooperation, empathy and mutual respect. Any communal action will require large numbers of americans to cooperate for instance protests or activism, at that point americans will discover their social structure does not allow for it and will not deliver. There is very little if any sense of community. It's been engineered out. It's unlikely individuals who have been devalued and left feeling worthless will make common cause in a hyper adversorial social structure.
I recommend you don't even think about the term SMB. It's such a broad category.

You can't just group all small businesses together and say you can't sell to this group. They all have different pain points and problems. Some products address them (slack), others don't (op)
It would, but given the risk of criminal charges I don't think the hacker's likely to do that.
I think people should be given a stark choice - either eat government provisioned rations, take public transport, and live in public housing (socialism) or contribute to a fluctuating capitalist economy and roll the dice a bit. Then likely make a bit more money on average, although less predictable (capitalism)
I guess they value the founder more than the money? Their lottery ticket already failed, this is a pure free bonus round.
The same way you know (or don't) that your existing OTP app is not uploading your secret key.
Happy Tweet, Sad Tweet – Building a Naive Bayes Classifier in SQL
There are anti-capitalists who support markets, and it is not ridiculous to do so. Capital is a concept independent of trade, though the two tend to rub up against one another a lot in the Western world.

So, it's not necessary to oppose all trade in order to oppose the notion that one person can own everything people need in order to survive and rent it to everyone else.
"We had raised a total of $2.8M (2 rounds)"
"we were burning $100K/m and making $9K/m in revenue"

That is how startups in America work: a) take any idea b) find enough believers c) throw money at the problem until it either works out or fails.

I mean are those people for real? It's like watching 5y olds playing monopoly

How about: If you need millions investment for your idea then your idea is just BAD (except you are building Teslas maybe)
Don't some of those things already exist?
I am the kind that reads thrice before hitting send. It would be too slow/too weird to do that with video or voice notes. Text is deathless.
How will actual automation impact small and in some cases medium-sized businesses? If I'm running a restaurant chain with 2-3 locations, does it make economic sense to employ robotic sweepers and chefs? Granted that won't replace all jobs lost, manual labor would still be valued in such areas.
We can't lock up homosexuals but we can lock up pedophiles and zoophiles

It's extremely offensive to compare homosexuality to the others. They aren't on the same spectrum, they're categorically different. Homosexuality involves to consenting adults, the others cannot by definition (according to legal and social norms).

We can't deny jobs or voting rights to women but we can deny jobs and voting rights to foreigners.

Consider that this method of constructing comparisons is ridiculously arbitrary and creates a slippery slope. "We fish with worms but not with Chinese. Therefore no morals!" Huh?
It's much worse.
Startup Looking for Digital Marketing Manager
As Schumpeter argued, capitalism enables its own enemies. Under socialism, the critics would be too busy trying to get the next meal to theorize critiques of capitalism. Despite our serious problems, we've never had it so good as in the last half century. We certainly would be worse off under any other economic system.

Unfortunately, this is a generation that gets most of their civic awareness from Hollywood, social media, and a homogenously leftist intelligentsia. Throw in a crisis and some stagnation, and is it really any wonder that young people hold such preposterous views?
>the naive delusion that you can disrupt all aspects of human nature by applying enough technology

This. Absolutely this. Superior software/technology has, is, and will lose to crappy stuff from time to time. And here is why... psychology trumps technology. If your technology doesn't align well with psychology then you have an enormous uphill climb to conquer. If your solution requires people to fight their nature, best of luck to you.
Where did you get the idea that Bitcoin is mined by less than a dozen guys in China. This is absolutely false. There are major miners in the US, Georgia and elsewhere.
It's hard to make an argument against pedophilia (as a sexuality) which doesn't also argue against homosexuality.

Of course gay men raping other men is bad and is still a crime, just as adults raping children is bad. But that's not what contemporary culture says. It says it's wrong to be sexually attracted to children even without causing any harm.

There were cultures in history where sex with children was accepted, such as the Romans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty#The_Romans but they recognized that it was harmful to the child so it was limited to slaves and other people who they didn't care about.
Sure, you can blame it on capitalism if you want, but pay close attention to a recurring theme in this article such as

" The minimum wage, which peaked in 1968, would have reached $21.72 in 2012 had it kept pace with inflation."

Along with
"Prestigious jobs are increasingly clustered in cities where rent has tripled or quadrupled"

This is not a mystery. QE and inflation is a direct wealth transfer from the poor to the rich. It's basic math and I'll repeat myself once again. When the upper middle class and rich can leverage themselves into assets that grow proportionally to inflation, they get richer and poor people get poorer. This is in addition to the fact that inflation is often a lopsided event from the top down (Fed lends to banks, which then lend to consumers etc.)
How do you define theft? The contract explicitly allows the money to be taken so it cannot legally be called theft.

Edit: If you cannot see that this is something new then I'm not sure that we can have a productive conversation on this topic.