skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
At the end of the day, the EU as it is is something that was shoved onto the people of Europe by big business, bureaucrats, Eurocrats etc. Working people feel all the negative impact of open borders and so-called "free trade", and the 1% gets all the gains from it. The mass of people barely feel they have any control over the Parliament of the UK, never mind the even more remote government in Brussels.

Many see the EU as constituted as something concocted by bureaucrats in business and government, for their own ends, a view which I think is correct. So the UK or Greece and the like being fed up with the EU should come as no surprise.

I think the EU as organized is a bad idea. I don't think European integration is a bad idea, but it was done without much consultation of the populace of Europe, and things like this are the result.

In the US, the popular candidates with mass rallies bucking against their party establishments have been Trump and Sanders, although Sanders was pushed aside for the establishment candidate with the help of superdelegates etc. Congressional job ratings for 2016 fluctuated between 13% to 18% approval, 75-84% disapproval. The average American feels alienated from Washington DC because Washington DC is unresponsive to the desires of the average American. The situation is not dissimilar from Europe.
sure and they'll all have to negotiate a separate trade deal with the UK, we all know how simple those are to get done.
Why would she need to? She can stay the head of state of all the countries the UK might split into.

(She's also Queen of all Australian states individually.)
Countries have used foreign issued currency before; while it's likely that the same impulse that led a country to leave would also lead it to adopt is own currency, there's no fundamental reason that would have to be the case, they could afford one (or more) existing major ) or even minor, though that's less likely) currencies. That obviously leaves them at the mercy of monetary policy focused on others needs, but it may also reduce uncertainty due to lack of established trust in the new government translating into volatility of the new currency.
I have heard that it's possible to talk MinGW into linking against MSVCRnnn.DLL instead, with some effort. And then you have to figure out how to ship the redistributable, both physically and legally, but if you can do that, more power to you. Here's a plausible-sounding set of instructions:

http://www.pygame.org/wiki/PreparingMinGW
Mercedes-Benz in the USA is strictly a luxury marque, and they want to keep it that way so they only bring over the larger, higher tier models with a lot of nice options. You don't see A and B class Mercs here.
UK importing tons of good from EU means that the uk is generating a lot of jobs for EU countries.
So, every town and village should build a wall and secede?
Very nice. Would be great to explore geometry problems.

Another approach towards the same goal is this http://ravichugh.github.io/sketch-n-sketch/
> Congratulations, you will see the United Kingdom disappear

Please don't post flamewar-style comments here, especially in divisive threads.
I'm not sure this is a strong counterargument.
> Is this unreasonable?

I don't like hypotheticals because we can always construct one to justify anything. Want to justify torture? Invent a hypothetical 'ticking time bomb scenario'.

It depends on people's individual beliefs; if you want to restrict the board to certain beliefs, you'd better ask everyone.

> You explain why I don't want to accuse any individuals of guilt. Just that it seems that overall, as a group, there seem to be unacceptable beliefs held.

I don't understand how a group can hold beliefs. The mechanism doesn't exist; humans are not hive minds. More importantly, you can't accuse the group without accusing all its individual members. Unless you want to unjustly penalize the >1 billion individuals and apply group guilt, there's no application for this 'group belief'.

The Catholic Church as an institution, is different from the group of all Catholics.
> the EU should focus on actually making the EU work well.

The EU works pretty well. Just last week one of my Romanian work colleagues paid an Irish company (Ryanair) only $80 euros for a 2-person airplane trip to another European capital (Rome). All that would not have been possible without all of us being in the EU. For comparison, just look at how crazy expensive airfares are in the States for similar flights. And I could find other, numberless examples from the day to day life with which people have accustomed themselves, they have started to see them as granted, but which would have not been possible without the EU. UK's decision is sheer idiocy.
It's a bit more complicated in Germany, because Die Linke is in some sense a continuation of the former East German ruling party.

So the accusations are not so much that `these voters belong to us'. But: no self-respecting party should form a coalition with these dictators ever.

That taboo has been broken on the state level in East German a long time ago. But it still holds some power on the federal level, and in West German states.
There are a number of issues and it likely will affect each industry separately. The main concern are trade agreements that are US-EU vs. ones that are US-UK. The former will have to be renegotiated again or dropped completely with respect to the US-UK trade.

It's impossible to say what will happen in each case as the US will have the upper hand in US-UK negotiations. Also, dropping the UK from the EU is less favorable in EU-US deals than it was as it's dropping a large economy from its market.

However, the election results in the US are probably a bigger consideration in the short term as a huge anti-free trade or anti-immigration election in the US would cause major changes as well.
I'm confused; how does that work?
For ten hours I could read a Song of Ice and Fire, which the author took a shit-ton of years to write, and which is still being written. One of those books will cost me 7.45 on a kindle. I could easily get ten hours for the fraction of the price of say -- the new Doom, which costs 86 dollars on top of the hardware I don't have to play it.

The best gaming experiences always had effort put in to story and character, which doesn't cost anything compared to cutting edge fidelity. High fidelity is not required AT ALL to convey either emotion or story. Fidelity is... Do you remember reel to reel music Albums? No? Because they were a waste of money, and time, and completely unnecessary. How about 60fps film? DV? Shit. All awful awful shit anti-art.

Here's the thing. The best ,most engaging content is always simulacrum. It is not simulation. It is supposed to tell a story and evoke a feeling. Over production kills character in just about every sense the human mind can pick up. I always prefer impressionism over realism, because -- what's the point? I could just go outside and live my life, or go paint-balling. Art is supposed to be hyper-real, which means a simulation of life will always end up second best to a great simulacrum -- something which is only required to represent with style and evocation of feelings. Like a book, it forces our minds to invest in the process of suspension of disbelief. All fidelity gives is resolution. Above a certain threshold fidelity is completely irrelevant.
The odds were advertised---but were they actually still accepting bids at these odds?
The markets are mostly reacting to the uncertainty this creates, rather than judgement if this was good or bad in the long term.

Nobody knows the future status of the uk.

If we get good deals expect the markets to recover in a couple of years.
If we don't leave the EU, it will completely destroy the conservative party. Very unlikely that they will risk their jobs. If they do, chances are a eurosceptic party would get elected in 2020 if a general election isn't called before.
And a lot of those manufacturers are gonna move those manufacturing out of the UK if they have to pay a 10% tariff to serve the 10 times larger EU market.

Most British car companies are owned by foreigners anyways, and if anything, this was a vote against non-British than a vote against the EU.
Note: I just realised that I licensed kernel/cgroup_pids.c under GPLv2-only. which is wrong. I've sent a patch that also includes a fix to that header.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146673699017938&w=2
Ask HN: How do you use (Linux) containers?
I am interested in understanding how people use containers today - e.g. which "system" do you use, what you run on them, how you deploy them... And what kind of problems you face.

In particular, I'm interested in Docker, Kubernetes, Mesosphere (DCOS), AWS ECS, etc.

Thanks for sharing your experience.
As far as I've read London was quite the shit-hole in the late 1970s-early 1980s, it could very happily return to that status.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11965054 and marked it off-topic.
I'm getting tired of hypocrisy being held up as the ultimate sin. The world is more complex than that. Humans cannot fully logically integrate EVERYTHING they believe at the same time, it's just biologically impossible. Expecting people to be 100% consistent 100% of the time is ultimately silly.

And for companies, well they are ultimately just groups of people. So the same issue.

Also, open and tolerant doesn't mean unlimited anything goes. This applies even to the parent-child relationship. If you disagree, think about the parents who had to deal with children who steal, use violence and destroy stuff. You ultimately have to draw a line at self preservation! Same thing for a company and culture. You have to preserve the culture, and if that means ejecting people who mean to do it harm, then how is that a horrible thing? The author himself would eject counter-revolutionaries from his revolutionary party, so in principle he agrees with this sentiment.

As for the 'Don't Be Evil' - lots of people at Google still believe in this. The problem is once you go global, life gets very very hard and you are forced to make difficult decisions. And sometimes you get them wrong. And you try again. But to harp on bad decisions is like a husband who won't EVER let his wife forget THAT ONE TIME. That's hardly constructive.
You replied to the comment that noted it was down 7% which is an outrageous move for a currency.
A 7 Year Old Has VISION of Asteroid Hitting Our Driveway – Profetic Dreams
UK most likely wont be able to negotiate similar terms with EU countries. France/Germany at least will be pissed with them and give UK terrible deals out of spite. I expect a lot of other EU countries to do the same.

edit: Also I now have to buy my shit from France/Germany Amazon? (Or just have an English language Amazon for the continental Europe please...)
Single market. Despite some bigots who don't want Polish people existing near them, having free movement of people, goods, capital and all the rest of it is really good for the participant economies.

Can you imagine if US citizens had to get a visa to move from New York to California?
You should aim for substance. Comments going on about downvotes are the antithesis of substance, which is why we have not one but two guidelines asking you not to do this: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Your original problem was that glib comments aren't substantive either, so they're deprecated here, especially when they have an uncivil tinge.
True, seems like that at second reading.

(Seems like a pretty silly requirement to me. Can't they just use the tax and welfare system to combat inequality in a sane way?)
In fairness to the SNP they increased their number of votes. It's a quirk of the voting system that their seat share decreased.

If there is a second vote I imagine the tone will be a lot less positive. Last time it was all about being a small, wealthy nation with the desire to stand up and make its own name in the world. This time, the previously small but poisonous anti-English voices in the campaign will be emboldened. It will be a vote to leave in panic rather than in confidence.

Overall as a staunch supporter of Scottish independence this is nowhere close to what I want to see.
Aren't you forgetting about robots.txt?

(The argument about stealing becomes more complicated when you have to explain why people are not putting up a robots.txt. You might still be able to make it, though.)
Out of spite? Refusing to neogiate decent trade deals would mean tons of job losses for Germany and France.
Let's call the rising tide of politicians shouting "Our Nation First!" (And stage whispering "Our Race First") something like "the New Right". Not fascism per se but isolationist, anti-laissez faire and definitely anti-science.

So what is "The New Left"? Left wing politics in the UK is in disarray, Bernie Saunders espouses a vision that most of Europe sees as frankly old hat centrist, and there is no defining political viewpoint that is encompassing the (now dispossessed) young, the march of technology, the lessons learnt over communism and socialism.

Is the answer just to double down on democracy? Turn to your principles in time of trouble? We are losing the argument in open debate though. Just more "trust us, this is business as usual" does not seem to be a rallying cry.

Where is the intellectual core of what will oppose the New Right?
The alt-right agenda gets their first win. It's not just crazy ideas that people will never validate.
The EU is the opposite of freedom. This is Britain choosing to not let unelected bureaucrats of Brussels tell Britain what laws we should have.
I don't. My coworkers don't. I rarely see people in my building doing that.

That's the problem with universal quantifiers, they are so easily disproven.
> There is increasing wealth inequality, cuts to public services, less job security and so on

These are Tory policies; Labor opposes them.

> free movement of labour being particularly damaging to these communities

How? The UK has had internal free movement of labor for a long time, and it didn't damage them. Blaming the immigrants sounds suspiciously like populist propaganda. It doesn't make it false, but can you back it up?

EDIT: From today's NY Times:

there was no question that while the immigrants contributed more to the economy and to tax receipts than they cost

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/world/europe/britain-brexi...
>projecting from a survey of Egyptians to the likely behavior of every U.S. immigrant of a certain religion seems like an incredible stretch

"36% of 16 to 24-year-olds believe if a Muslim converts to another religion they should be punished by death, compared with 19% of over-55s"[1]

"27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the [Charlie Hebdo] Paris attacks"[2]

Apostasy is also a crime in rich, well-off countries, like the UAE. Between seeing how these nice countries operate, and these surveys of UK residents, I don't think it's a stretch to think some views might come with large migration. Again, this does not require discrimination against individuals. But it should allow criticism of views/beliefs, and informing the immigration selection process, perhaps via quizzing.

And you know, it doesn't even need to be targeted. Simply knowing that there's a large enough group with such views might be enough to quiz _all_ immigrants on those topics. That way it's non-discriminatory.

But I'll turn it around: under what circumstances would you agree with more filtering, increased quizzing, or any such thing based on a group's beliefs?

1: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6309983.stm

2: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European...
Sounds like you might want CoreOS or just fleetd or Shipyard (which is Docker Swarm based). Is there any reason Docker Swarm can't support the your redundancy needs?
FWIW I was remain. I have no idea how this will play out. Twenty or thirty years ago I would have had definite ideas of how a UK exit would have played (quite well), now I just don't know.

I would hope that efforts can be made to make the UK economy more inclusive. The areas voting overwhelmingly to leave are all the areas that have been suffering since the 80s - NE, NW, Wales.

How the UK operates and competes globally now, I simply have no idea. I'm also concerned we're going to lose a lot of the protections we had in the EU.
The US and the EU are really different entities.
But even worse losses in the UK, a fact that every other negotiating partner knows. The rest of the EU has all the leverage.
I wish they would revert to Imperial units.
Because it's unknown and it's actually the same points that have been brought when Switzerland decided to stay outside. The arguments were:

- We are going to be isolated
- Our economy will crash
- We will struggle to find high educated people
- We will just disappear

Now, after almost 25 years we can't say we did the wrong thing, but hey, UK is not Switzerland, it's a totally different economy which different proportions.

I don't think this has to be considered totally bad, it's a sign something HAS to change, but now the brits have to work to make this happen in the very best way, it's an opportunity and a clear demonstration that the actual structure of the EU can't work on this way, this seems to be pretty clear.

Only time will say if the decision was good or not, but which side is going to end this decision is up to the britains, they have to work hard and do it now to make this be a good thing, rather the beginning of the end, starting with keeping Scotland in the UK.
I truly do not understand our society. Europe is split, even if the countries aren't, the people are. Every political decision ends up being a race of the well-educated against the less-educated. The clash of classes happens not only in Europe, the Trump success is the same story. Maybe I'm just too young and uninformed to understand and that's how the world works ever since?
It's a revising chamber ( - can extend discussion on difficult issues) whose decisions can be ultimately overridden by the House of Commons. There are many problems with the way it's populated but it's hardly in the same category as an institution as byzantine and undemocratic as the EU.
Switzerland has had trade and free movement agreements with the EU for a while now. This argument alone doesn't justify a full membership IMO. Being a member of the economical zone does just that.
A lot of businesses, including startups, will consider where they need to be based for access to a European single market.

Until today that was likely to be London.
It's not just trade laws, there are also laws about employment across borders, taxation across borders, etc.
It likely means less immigrants coming in to do tech work in the UK, but there would still be huge incentives to allow some form of immigration since the UK wants to be able to have its citizens get work abroad. If they go to a more Australian model, likely alot tech work would be under a protected class of worker that would be allowed to establish some kind of residency.
I don't know, the markets all across the EU are taking a big hit out of uncertainty. I'm sure there will be some spiteful negotiations over certain things, but I'm guessing all sides will want to stabilize their economies as best as possible. And to do that they will have to work together with the UK.

Maybe years down the road there will be some more bickering and trade wars. But I think immediately everyone will look for stability, at least within the economic realm.
> white libtards

This breaks the HN guidelines, which ask you not to call names in arguments. Please (re-)read them and post civilly and substantively, or not at all.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
Please disregard early downvotes.

It still mostly balances out in the longer run so far. But these days will end as well.
What is nato for $200
They may be able to negotiate similar deals in the long term - but presumably those who voted to leave aren't going to accept the terms of those deals, such as free movement of people.
>>Can you imagine if US citizens had to get a visa to move from New York to California?

That's categorically different. The US is united under one national identity, so the ties between states are much stronger. Whereas the EU consists of many different countries and cultures, and each one has a long history of nationalism and rivalry with neighbors.
But the UK wants to keep the free market. And I doubt european countries will be ready to hurt their own exports by turning the UK down (most european countries really cannot afford that).
I would hope they wouldn't do it out of pure, personal spite, but I suspect there will be a lot of interest in discouraging other countries from leaving the EU. Not saying this is right or wrong, but it is not a completely unreasonable expectation.
Gophers, please tag your releases
What could european politicians have done differently at that point? Also polls in the UK are notoriously unreliable.
That may be true in the present, but I think people are mainly concerned about the future. I strongly believe in a basic income, but implementing it in a country with open borders would be impossible. Same problem with the US, where no individual state can implement socialized health care, or they would be swarmed with sick people from every other state.

As for voters in the UK, I think they are concerned about future immigrants, not the current immigrant population.
Free movement is awful for the working class and great for the elites, which is the main reason for brexit happening. We want control over our borders and control over our laws.
Correct me if I am wrong, but from what I have read of Churchill's thoughts on the matter (only his biography), he believed that Europe should be united but that the UK wasn't to be a part of it. Did I miss something?
Too soon to calculate the damage on the markets and how long until recovery?
There it is.

You have all been listening to nonsense media way too much in my opinion.
Diversity vs homogeneity is a preference. Neither is morally superior.
There are many ways to look at it. One way is that the old non-unified Europe used to fight a lot, and the smaller states could be preyed upon. The unified one doesn't have these issues. Therefore you could see the EU as a Good Thing (in fact they won a Nobel Peace Prize for this). Therefore anything in the opposite direction is bad. Of course, things are not that simple.

In general, I think that society is slowly moving towards less borders and more global cooperation. I would be surprised if in a thousand years there are still 200 individual countries and governments. This step seems like a wrinkle in that trend.
The ultimate Docker cheatsheet
I don't think you should be getting downvoted. I totally agree with this. Plurality voting is awful, and at least in the US, probably the most fundamentally broken part of politics. There's a good organization that is working to promote better voting methods, the Center for Election Science, that people should take a look at if they doubt this: https://electology.org/
Absolutely not. Changing the structural framwork of the nation is not something to be done based on an issue's short term popularity. If the issue can maintain consistent support for a decade or more that's a lot better signal that it might be a good long-term idea.
Europe is a US ally; the US wants them stronger. Also, dis-unified Europe cost the US quite a bit in the first half of the 20th century.
The Scottish nationalists currently want to remain in NATO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_debate_in_the_Scottish_Na...
Not really. Because it will be tit for tat strategy.

In order to not get job losses, both have to cooperate