skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry, I edited the reply and removed the description of shower. My remark was not meant as a slight on them. I just want to show you what I know about them. Most people do not have a chance to see how poor Chinese lives, because the information you can get is controlled by China propaganda machine. Beautiful Beijing, huge international airport, rich buyers. Even you already have a Chinese Visa, you can't travel to Tibet without special authorization. In most cases, the officer would reject your application and tell you Beijing already has a big Buddhism Lama temple in its heart so you can get everything you want to know at there.

And, as we are talking about human rights here, please take a look on another side: The Tibet itself. If there were no communists, would it get a better human right record? How do they treat women? Why male student can get a scholarship but females can’t? Could the U.S. government offer any help to this? The people in this news lives in another society, none of them has western education, so you can’t wish them conforming to western standards. How can you convince them in a peaceful way?
You're missing an essential point of the whole argument. Either the DAO as it is is self-contained or it is a failure. If it needs the courts, either to enforce a contract or to try to prevent enforcing a contract then the whole thing is dead.

On which side of such a lawsuit you are is not important, the fact that the DAO can not be trusted to be complete and that there is a possibility that contracts once executed can be rolled back makes it un-viable in this incarnation.

Personally I think it was oversold, this lesson could have been learned a lot cheaper but that's easy to say after the fact. As bug bounties come this was a pretty good one, and I'd be highly surprised if it was the only flaw in the present implementation.
Cassandra Spark Analytics
It was not an analogy, it was an hypothetical situation. If my human rights end where loss of life on your side begins, then according to that stated belief, the situation I mentioned is morally acceptable, is it not?
Flash Boys: Not So Fast is a rebuttal to Michael Lewis's book that basically explains why it is wrong, point by point.

https://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-...

It's quite good.
I didn't downvote you, but your comment left me scratching my head. You made a statement without any explanation. Care to elaborate why imperative programming is so bad here? Real-world contracts also use imperative style.
Recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11879963
"Cutting trade with China would take a decade or more if it can be done at all at this stage."

But I could finally buy decent pliers made in the USA, like I once could 25 years ago.
Unicode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_%28typography%29#In_uni...
My point is that they may not know how or whether to submit an asylum request. Do you know the process?

I don't hate you, I just pity you for having a selfish worldview - I hope you don't one day find yourself in need of help only to find your alter ego going "nope, I don't believe you."
Well, it seems to me that if a majority of South Africans oppose allowing these people in, they should not be allowed in.
This article has a very denigrating tone. And it doesn't even cite the research that it is trying to disprove.
It's been 6 months. Have these "new, unpublished, figures" since been published, or otherwise shown to be correct?

In that news article, Timmermans also argued that border closures are not the right solution.

Edit: If https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 is correct, then the 40% refers to the people specifically from Syria. Most of the remaining 60% are from Iraq or Afghanistan. As that link says:

> almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict.
It's unclear how reminding us that Socialist Fascists locked up Socialist Democrats is proof that Nazis were somehow secretly Libertarians.

The Nazis nationalized industry. They're Socialists, on the left.
Except you don't know what will ever lead to "less net violence", nor do you have a way to quantify net violence beyond bodycount -- and I don't think you want that.
Why not? Often, addiction centers get money from health insurers, who are in effect dealers in opioids, etc.
I think people get consensus finality mixed up with eventual consistency. (To be fair, they do sound like similar things.)

Nakamoto Consensus (used by Bitcoin and others) never reaches consensus finality, i.e. a point in time when you can be sure that consensus has been achieved. All you can do is estimate the probability that a block is in the final chain.

That said, Nakamoto Consensus has some really nice properties compared to classical consensus algorithms. For example, most "classical" BFT consensus algorithms have a worst-case message complexity of O(N^2) (or in some new highly-academic algorithms O(N polylog(N))). Nakamoto Consensus, in contrast, has O(N) worst-case message complexity. That's what enables Bitcoin (and the like) to scale so nicely to thousands of nodes.

Of course, if you're building a permissioned ledger with 25 nodes, that's irrelevant; the classical algorithms will work fine.

There's more discussion of this in the SCP paper: Luu, Loi, Viswesh Narayanan, Kunal Baweja, Chaodong Zheng, Seth Gilbert, and Prateek Saxena. "SCP: A Computationally-Scalable Byzantine Consensus Protocol For Blockchains."
> You have invested in an experimental 'organization' that is defined by the contract that is its code.

Greed trumps contracts.
If someone is publically offering to buy a stock for $10.00 on Exchange A (i.e. they've placed displayed limit order), then it's illegal for you to sell that stock to someone else for $9.99 on Exchange B. If that trade did happen, the order on Exchange A is said to have been "traded through". The rule protects limit orders which have the best price available from missing out on a trade just because they were sent to the wrong exchange.
Even this advanced design only gets one hour of flight time with 800 pounds of batteries. Yikes.
They are http://www.who.int/gho/child_health/mortality/mortality_unde...
You say that like money is not a motivator powerful enough for people to risk their life.
> Yes, the kernel Linux has _many_ problems. But without it, we would be living in a much worse world than even the most broken of Linux interfaces and semantics. But GNU/Linux definitely was a saviour for Unix.

Maybe you would be living in a much worse world, if your entire world up to that point in time consisted of Microsoft(R) Windows(R) and an intel based PC tin pail.

I was fine with using a binary only version of Solaris, IRIX, and HP-UX; so long as I could get those gratis, along with compilers and software RAID, that was fine by me, as I had no interest in building my own OS at that point in time (unlike now). I also grew up on Commodore computers, where, when one bought a computer, it would come with detailed schematics, and the hardware was documented in detail[1][2].

I can only offer you empathy for the world you grew up in, but that does not give you the right, nor are you correct in assuming, that everyone else lacked the same freedoms you lacked: not everybody grew up in the United States which has fascist copyright laws. The country where I grew up did not have any copyright laws, and if it weren't for that, it would still be in the dark ages of Informatics and computer science, and I would not have ever become a computer professional. Other countries, for example Sweden and Spain, still have lax copyright laws, and thank goodness for that. The point is, don't make the error of assuming that the entire world was mis-fortunate and lacked freedom in this sense.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Hardware-Reference-Manual-technical-r...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Amiga-Memory-Kernel-Reference-Manual/...
I doubt this is zoned for multiple dwellings.
Same to you. Can you explain why you think so?
An Introduction to Mocking in Python
It still pigeon holes the smarts by reinforcing stereotypes. It is only because the rise of startup culture that this show exists.
It sure seems that way, but this doesn't have anything to do with breach of contract per your original comment. Forking and changing how it works seems completely kosher from the contractual side, but seems like a bad idea for the reasons you stated.
Check Point CEO Suggests Firm Considering Leaving Israel
Important addendum: Node is not for real-time safety-critical systems https://mobile.twitter.com/d4rw1n1s7/status/7430105947862507...
I feel the last sentence, unfortunately, is relevant. Too many people now just downvote without explanation, and that is not helpful to the conversation. In something like this, which is a question disguised as a rant or vice versa, an explicit request is, unfortunately, necessary today.
Ask HN: What's your favorite Python quirk?
Any unusual or unexpected feature of the language
e.g. Spyglass vs Microsoft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyglass,_Inc.

The deal stipulated that Spyglass would receive a base quarterly fee for the Mosaic license plus a royalty from Microsoft's Internet Explorer revenue.[6]

If IE revenue is $0, then royalties are $0, too.

Not nice, but perfectly legal.

> Without real consequences, what is the incentive to participate if the rules can change when they don’t always go in your favor?

That's the root problem here. The law works because people believe that it works. Once people lose that belief, the typical response is violent suppression, or violent revolution.
Intel CEO Refuses to Answer Question on Whether NSA Can Access Processors (2014)
"Not in the way you are probably thinking, but used for ground ops leading to spacewalks, checks and balances obv" - Collin Estes
There's a nice list here:

https://github.com/cosmologicon/pywat

Here's another one. Compare "x = 256; y = 256; x is y" with "x = 257" (enter) "y = 257" (enter) "x is y" with "x = 257; y = 257; x is y". It makes a difference whether x and y are assigned on the same line or not. From here:

http://glasnt.com/blog/2016/05/28/on-language-oddities.html
tl;dr: If you're a foreign-born entrepreneur, US immigration may be the kick in the pants you need to go global.
If you're an American voter, you should stop kicking foreign-born entrepreneurs in the pants.

Personal anecdata:

I'm Canadian. I have two degrees from UWaterloo (CS & Math), have been on the founding team of three major exits (one "unicorn"), and have a Harvard MBA. I've lived in the US, mostly under TN status, for fifteen years. (Unlike H1-B, TN status is not dual-intent, and does not allow immigration.)

I'm starting a new company now in Canada. Labor-intensive, probably creating a few hundred good jobs in the first year. I'd prefer to start it in the US, preferably Nevada, but have no acceptable way to legally do so.

This was frustrating for a while, but I'm over it. Europe & Asia are operationally more complex to serve, but that's less overhead than immigration. And I've learned the rest of the world has just as much opportunity (and probably more available investment!) than the US.

I'm just one person, but I've seen this play out five or six times among my peer group alone. If you're a non-citizen entrepreneur with valley/NYC connections or US startup experience, I strongly recommend taking that knowledge and competing in the bigger global pool.

As the global economy flattens, the odds are growing every year that the next megacorp in the US market won't be American. The government should be fighting that trend, not doing everything in its power to accelerate it.

edit: "no legal way" => "no acceptable legal way". Anything is possible.
I can see how forking in the case of a technology change is acceptable but I can't see how forking just to undo certain contracts would ever be acceptable. That's the foundation the whole thing rests on, if contracts can be rolled back at will (and this nicely exposes that it can be done to all those that weren't informed about this) then they are worthless.

That's what makes this attack so elegant, it strikes at the heart of the problem rather than 'just' take some money.

An even worse attack would have been to do this slowly over a longer period of time, which would make it even harder to roll back (but would have increased the chance of discovery before the damage was this large).

That must have been a tough decision on the part of the attacker.
What I Saw in Syria
I can show you some gravestones if you'd like. The US health system is essentially inaccessible to those with chronic but treatable conditions who aren't continually holding down relatively good jobs. I can go and get my major depression treated at $5 per minute because I have an employer that pays $20k per year for health insurance.

I know families of five whose household income is less than my health insurance premium. I live in a first-world country where people buy antidepressants that they need from their friends and off the street, and have to beg/barter to refill the prescription that keeps their body from destroying their GI tract. Suicide is an ever-increasing problem. I step over the homeless on the way to work and reflexively look for signs of respiration. The dead are everywhere.
The optimal broadband speed
I don't understand your certainty - the point about law is that there is an exception to every rule.

Courts enforce contracts that contain unfavorable terms all the time. And malciousness is not a part of contract law. It's true that contracts can be set-aside (though not always) when they have a criminal basis, but it's not at all clear that this is the case here.

There was an unequivocal and unilateral offer made to the world in the text - that will be hard to read down as anything other than an intention to contract.
Yes, but do consider that "economic reasons" can include "militias keep burning my crops, it is too unstable to make a living".

You can draw the line wherever you like, just remember that one day someone may draw a line that affects you, and you may not like it.

Me, I'm some kind of idiot that believes in being good to your fellow man.
Because it is an insanely interesting problem to try and solve technically.

That is, a medium of exchange is essential to a modern economy and yet how to objectively regulate the supply of that medium of exchange without exploitation can be considered somewhat of a paradox. The quest is to solve the paradox via ever evolving technological solutions.
Yeah, given a choice between liberal values and democracy always pick liberal values. We know what's best, not the plebeians.
This is the most insightful comment about this incident that I have seen so far. The problem is that the Etherum system uses an imparative language to describe smart contracts. This opens the door very wide for the kind of bugs that led to the theft of $200M from The DAO. The correct solution would probably have been to design a domain-specific declarative language that provides abstract building blocks for smart contracts. This would have allowed to hide the procedural complexity in the interpreter and contract bugs like the present one would not have been possible. Even if there was a problem, it could likely be fixed in the interpreter leaving the contracts and the blockchain untouched! This means that a lot of unanticipated problems would not have been fatal for the contracts. The problem of the current approach is that it conflates the business logic and it's implementation thus increasing the burden for contract authors and increasing the attack surface.

In many other domains, a suboptimal choice of language paradigm would just add some extra friction but in the domain of smart contracts it can lead to catastrophic failures. Many people claim that the cause of the present disaster is just a faulty contract and that the Etherum system is working correctly. Some even say that the present case shows how well the technology is working. But willtim's comment makes it clear that there may be a fundamental problem with Ethereum. I wonder whether the imparative paradigm was a conscious design choice or something that just happened because the developers didn't even realize that it was a design choice.

Edit: I wrote this before willtim's added his edit 2.
Pythonista 3 for iOS
That's one person, who in January referenced an internal report. Has that report since been published? Was he correct in that statement?

That one report has been repeated many times, but repetition isn't verification.

If I read https://euobserver.com/migration/132048 correctly, the 40% number refers specifically Syrian refugees. Quoting from it:

> Iraqis and Afghans, it says, each represent around 24 percent of the mix, or just under 50 percent together.

> In other words, almost 90 percent the people who arrived by sea in the EU in December came from countries gripped by war or emerged from a wider regional conflict.

As to your other comment, when people flee they want to move some place where they have a future. Few want a future living in a refugee camp. Few want a future living as if they are second-class citizens and subject to xenophobia.

I'm sure many would choose to go to the US even though the US does not offer "the most beneficial social security". Many have gone to Brazil.
Those number seem unbelievably high, given there are less than 18 million Syrians total.
We don't have to pay for ambulance services in the UK. Charging for that is insane. That's the part that isn't fair in your scenario.
I seem to recall that he used to work for cia or? Can't remember exactly.
Schmidt is sitting on an advisory board, not taking a position within DoD. You can ask about the propriety of a corporate executive sitting on a board advising the civilian defense component on new and emerging technologies -- especially since Google until recently was a speculative-tech defense contractor through BosDyn -- but it's not uncommon and certainly nothing unusual to Google.

As for the OP, well, consider me skeptical of the idea that "digital government" can have a significant effect on governance itself. The problems within government agencies lie in a mix of politics, policies, processes and people, with a healthy dose of iron-triangle confusion of interests where applicable. Better digital can improve an agency's operations, but can't address whether those operations are fundamentally misguided.
The Road Ahead for Ethereum: Three Hard Problems
This code is very bad, without going into an exhaustive enumeration, case sensitive function names, variables with unclear scope all over the place and so on.

That it's imperative code is something that I don't think is damning by itself but all the side-effects (including side effects based on a single bit in the name of a function) really do warrant the 'accident waiting to happen'.
If you've ever been to Russia you will understand why people do not want to seek asylum there - they are as likely to be persecuted there as wherever they're coming from. Russians aren't terribly welcoming to non-Slavic peoples, and don't exactly have a wonderful human rights record, with the pogroms and the kulaks and all that.
How about you accept that people in the Middle East have their own agency, and are not merely pawns for other countries on a giant chess board?
Yes, but it would violate HN policy/use guidelines...
Abusing locals() - learnt it from @jroller

def foo():
"""
>>> foo()
{'a': 1, 'c': 3, 'b': 2}
"""
a = 1
b = 2
c = 3
return locals()
> It's bad enough that those with sufficient computing speed/power can already rip off the stock market

Who is getting ripped off?
The Case Against Modern, Over-Involved, Touchy-Feely Fatherhood
Maybe on average the price didn't change, but in the "no-tipping" case, customers can no longer self-select into their various price points.

What businesses actually want out of their pricing model is to have a bunch of people pay the maximum amount they'd be willing to pay for a uniform set of products, even though that maximum varies across the customer population. Having a single price for each of your products necessarily constricts your customer base, and it's actually pretty rare -- even your corner drug store publishes coupons in the shoppers' weekly to help bring the cheapskates in the door.

Eliminating tipping puts this restaurant into the "single price point" game, forcing them to pick a number that balances not only revenue per customer against customer volume, but also some intangibles -- having a big waiting list catches people's attention and makes your place seem more desirable, for instance, and lets some people pay with time instead of money, broadening your customer base. Plus the marginal efficiency of the kitchen is pretty high if its going full-bore all the time, and it likely makes better use of perishable supplies that are already paid for.

My guess is that what they have learned is that there's no single number you can pick that's "the same" as in the tipping scheme. The article talks about "high-energy millenials" who were put off by the high prices. This suggests a price-sensitive group, so probably not especially high tippers, but with some other feature that makes them valuable -- maybe they buy low cost but high-markup items, or maybe they help create an atmosphere that brings in some high rollers, or maybe they marginally increase the volume in the off-peak, allowing the kitchen to make better use of those already-mentioned already-paid-for, perishable ingredients.

Tl;dr a cost distribution is not fully characterized by its average, the shape also matters.
Many people have legitimate concerns over mass migration. It's not all a bunch of xenophobes.
But they so explicitly point to the code as the source of truth for the contract. Banking and trading firms use teams of lawyers to find loopholes in contracts and laws all the time. Why would digital contracts (code) not have the same level of scrutiny / unscrupulous behaviour? Guaranteed if big money is at play in the system non-code based exploits will be used by firms just as often.
What are those legitimate concerns? Income depression? Housing scarcity? Migration hasn't done that, decades of broken robber-baron policy has.
The banks needed to be bailed out or else there would've been a massive bank run on the scale of the Great Depression.

The people who made those MBS trades should have gone to jail, and they didn't. That's where the injustice stems from.
Because we missed the boat and we hope the boat sinks.

Search your feelings, you know it to be true.
> They haven't replied back.

I am responsible for uBlock Origin (the other uBlock is abandonware), and I haven't received anything from you. In any case, my answer would have been that I am not responsible of the content of 3rd-party filter lists, and in the current case you would need to contact malwaredomains.com, they are the ones listing you as malware.
I'll agree that if there is such a thing as moral aptitude we perhaps indeed aren't much better than previous generations.
But I don't see that precluding us having a much better body of moral rules.

And as far as pedophilia goes we are definitely adopting more nuanced views of it as of lately.
Tesco Bank mobile app won’t run with Tor Orbot tool installed