skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Geoiptool thinks I'm in Romania. As does Maxmind's free IP location database[1]. However, Google thinks I'm in New Delhi, until I grant permission to upload my actual location. Then it puts the marker right on my rooftop in Massachusetts.

I'm actually using a VPN (euro214.vpnbook.com), which, based on the name, should be somewhere in Europe. But who knows? If I disconnect the VPN, Google and Geoiptool both get my town right, and Maxmind is one town over. I'm using Verizon FiOS.

As for the geolocator, the ping times range from 172 ms (Frankfurt, Germany) to 524 ms (Singapore). Too large to be of use. With the VPN disconnected, it lucks out with a 12 ms ping to New York, resulting in a yellow circle accurately indicating that I am in the northeast US.

Looking at the no-VPN map[2], there are small circles corresponding the antipodes[3] of Singapore (purple) and Bangalore (blue). Without the New York ping, the map would be completely useless.

[1]https://dev.maxmind.com/geoip/geoip2/geolite2/

[2]https://i.imgur.com/nKw8u1D.png

[3]http://www.antipodesmap.com/
Hopefully we will forget earlier experiences, if we ever become anything near immortal.
I am not much close to UK politics.

But doesn't UKIP have a rising popularity right now?

If neither of the two traditional parties want to lead Brexit, would not this just result in UKIP volunteering and asking the population to back them in the next parliament elections?
If someone brought BTC in China and told it in the US none of it would be reflected on the blockchain.

From the exchange's database's perspective, it'll be a credit to their CNY account and a debit to their USD account. No BTC needed to be moved.

Thus the BTC volume isn't a valid measure of the total value of transactions done in BTC.
The Indie Web camp[1] guys have ideas for how to implement pretty much all of the value of Facebook using HTTP and other stuff on top of it — no need for a blockchain, no need for IPFS, just web servers talking to one another. They have protocols for mentions, for notifications, for authorisation. It's pretty cool.

If folks would implement it, then we could each have our own feed, like Facebook offers, and all we'd need is Apache or nginx and some server-side code.

[1] https://indiewebcamp.com/
I understand that in many of the areas that voted in favour of Brexit, most people vote for Labour. I would think that makes it more likely for Labour to win next elections? In that case Boris Johnson would be out of the picture regardless.

See: https://twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/746979915896070144
> Preparing a halfway decent digital image requires a great deal of skill, in the same way that a decent transcription of a written text requires a great deal of skill.

No it does not at all and as said already it needs to be a creative work(meaning transformative work that deviates from an obvious conclusion) as opposed to simply being difficult. And again, it is definitely not difficult.
Interesting. I'd never heard the Egyptian part before.
If they pull that on people. Use this technicality, it's like the establishment saying: "We grant you have a democracy, except when we disagree with you and your vote". Mocking voters. At that point, British democracy would become a farce with consequences quite possibly worse than the predictions remainders predict for leaving.
It will only tax higher income people at a lower rate if those higher income people don't receive any tangible benefits from high income. That's a good thing - the person who receives a lot from society will pay high taxes, while the person who receives a little will pay low taxes.

In contrast, with income taxes, the person who produces a lot for society will pay high taxes.

It's well accepted by economists that a consumption tax is the least distortionary tax.
Unless they dally for a year or two, then hold another referendum: given the age demographics of the vote, even a year or two of old people dying off and young ones coming of age is probably enough to shift it back (and it's even possible another vote held tomorrow would go Remain).
but where did the money come from? The EU doesn't just randomly dole out capital, right? The UK must pay into some sort of central fund? I have heard they pay as much as 3%(of GDP, taxes I am not sure) but the money must come from somewhere, of course. What capital flows out of UK and into the UK based on the old (or current) model?
Snowden Emails FOIA: NSA Used Insecure MS Word Macros
Same, and I've found it so useful I paid for a home license. Don't get me wrong, I love a little CLI action, but Charles is pretty seamless and works great with all of my more complicated localhost dev setups and the weird routing that comes along with that.
There's a term for this in the realm of public debate, which I am presently unable to recall, but the gist of it is the idea that you ask for a much greater concession than you really want in the hope the stakeholders settle closer to your ideal than if you'd simply laid your cards on the table.

By doing this repeatedly and over time we can (slowly, maybe less slowly?) change the course of history.
> Newspapers never made money

Sure they did; they sold subscriptions, and if you didn't have a subscription and wanted a copy, you bought one.

> TV shows don't make money

Sure they do; practically nobody gets broadcast TV any more, it's all paid cable or paid satellite or something of that sort. Granted that's a very indirect way of paying for individual shows, but now you can even do that directly with, for example, Netflix.

> Advertising has been a successful business model for literally centuries.

I agree that advertising has been around for many centuries, but it hasn't been a business model for most of that time; it's been a cost of doing business. According to Wikipedia[1], the first newspaper to have paid advertising was in 1836. And the first businesses to make money solely from advertising revenue (which is what "advertising as a successful business model" means to me) are much more recent than that.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_advertising
My information is pretty dated but I found Wolfram's collected papers a very good read (Amazon lists it as ~$40 but you can get it for under $5 used) [1]. I wouldn't be surprised if you could find a torrentable version as well.

You have to be careful about what kind of cellular automata you're talking about. There's the 'toy models' such as 1d and 2d cellular automata that Wolfram and Conway's Game of Life [2] fall into but there's also many others, including lattice gases and more complex modeling options. I assume you mean the cellular automata that have the flavor that Wolfram and Conway are talking about.

The linked Wolfram book is a 'classical' treatment where he introduces different classes (I,II,III and IV) of cellular automata, ranging from completely ordered (1d, rule 0, say) to completely disordered (1d, rule 32, say).

I hope I'm not rambling too much but from what I understand it was a commonly accepted that 'complexity happens at the edge of chaos' [2]. Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science" (again, from my understanding) essentially represents an evolving view (by Wolfram) where he graduates from "complexity happens at the edge of chaos" to "complexity is the norm, rather than the exception". Wolfram coins this as the "principle of computational equivalence" [3]. People have recommended ANKoS and I would really recommend against reading it. I think the principle of computational equivalence and the proof that rule 110 is Turing complete (given in ANKoS) are interesting but they're so buried in exceptionally bad writing as to be not worth the effort.

If you're interested in studying Conway's Game of Life [4] more, there's Golly [5], which is a wonderful piece of software. Cellular automata is a very large field and there are lots of different questions to ask about it, so you might want to limit your scope if you want more directed suggestions.

As a sort of tangential recommendation, I would highly encourage you to check out "Complexity and Criticality" by Christensen and Moloney [6]. Though they don't talk about the cellular automata that are described above, they motivate a lot of the different concepts of criticality, phase transitions and other motifs that show up repeatedly when discussing these models and others like them.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Cellular-Automata-Complexity-Collecte...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_of_chaos

[3] http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrincipleofComputationalEquival...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway's_Game_of_Life

[5] http://golly.sourceforge.net/

[6] https://www.amazon.com/Complexity-Criticality-Advanced-Physi...
Cultural things can be transmitted through geographic proximity rather than along ethnic lines, using "ethnic" in its original sense of "from a foreign nation" (ethnos).

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%94%CE%B8%CE%BD%CE%BF%C...

There are rural New England cultural practices which transcend ethnic groupings (Italian, Irish, etc).
Technically, sure.

Practically... it's a 52%/48% vote. Hardly a mandate. Some people say a revote might yield an opposite result, which means the current outcome is probably under the margin of error.

It wouldn't exactly be a miscarriage of democracy to not follow through and see how things unfold in the next couple of years, and maybe vote again to see if the gap widens or if our country remains split in the middle on the issue.

At any rate, this comment about the situation is frighteningly deep and chilling.
That's all speculative & hypotheticals. The whole "pay to play" or "pay for what you use" model has failed time and time again on the internet. In fact, I can't think of a single instance of that working on the large scale. It's a pie in the sky pipe dream with no chance of working. A libertarian fantasy.

Isn't that ideology center to the anti-net neutrality stance? People who only want to pay for what they use? I don't buy into that ideology because there are plenty of examples of it failing. Not only that, but doesn't serve everyone equally. And, if it wasn't already apparent, it hurts the poor. They wouldn't have access to the same content if they had to pay as they go.
Flux – improving democracy
> This seems a strange and kind of arbitrary requirement to me.

The intent is to protect creative expression that provides society with something new, not to protect any easily reproducible duplication effort.

If you choose not to make a transcript of an audio recording, someone else will do so if there is a demand for a transcription, hence the benefit to society in providing protections for your transcription is minimal.
In all this backlash, I wonder if the people who have come out strongly remain, realize that they are trying to help massive corporations subvert a democratic referendum. Its my understanding that the people who are most strongly for remain, fits nicely within the demographic that defines itself as progressive, whose policy choices take an often anti-corporate form.
This is exactly why the rest of the EU is pushing so hard for the UK to leave soon. "Put up or shut up", basically.
Well, to approximate a synthetic CDO squared, you'd first put all the moldy strawberries in a new basket, label it "Strawberries", send it to the rating agency where it would be rated AAA American strawberries, and then sell firms their choice of the least, middling, or most risky slices of the basket of "AAA American strawberries."
No, my argument is that they are a waste (literally, they cost more to implement than the money that is recoup'd from "illegal" activities).

Certain laws are truly silly, however. I am allowed to maintain that opinion. I may also be anti-authoritarian in general, and do not believe in the vast majority of consensual crimes.
If you like this you might like the visualizations in http://www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11701976/rapping-deconstructed-... too
There's a big difference between limiting permit hunting on predator species vs prey species.

I get it -- it's a pain in the ass if you're a farmer and you lose animals. But the answer isn't to externalize that by supporting continued extirpation of top predators.

And yes, occasionally even a baby / teenager / adult gets killed by not being aware of their surroundings. Too bad. Think like a mountain.
It still exists in the US. Copyright is automatic in the US as just about everywhere else, but registration is necessary if you wish to seek statutory damages rather than just actual damages in the case of infringement.
Still doesn't render html?
The risk is too great. To give humanity immortality at this immature age would be like giving a cave man a fully functional nuclear bomb. No matter how useful nuclear power is to us in this day and age.

Imagine if King Henry VIII had somehow figured out immortality. Do you think humanity would be better of today, some 500 years later, with him still sticking around and laying claim to the place? Pretty unlikely, right?

Equally, what right do you or anyone else living in this time have to steal the future from the generations that are to come? They will look back at this time and wonder about our ignorance, intolerance, and small-scale thinking. And fortunately both you and I will be long dead so as to not embarrass ourselves too much with our primitive ways of thinking.
There have been 3 previous exits from the EU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...

The assumption that Britain will do poorly is also questionable. Perhaps it will do just fine.

If so, referendums in other EU countries could start.
Is there a margin of error with a vote like this? Isn't it a direct count of people who want their opinion known? It isn't sampling and trying to figure out what everyone wants.
That's fine to say, just answering the question of "what significant subsidies did x get" where x did get subsidies.

There are probably many companies that make your point much better is all.
Is Indian (IT) and Indian (casino) equally impolite?
I think that given the weak mandate and highly regional nature of the vote, there would be a pretty good justification for politicians to not follow through and invoke article 50.

This doesn't mean ignoring the results of the referendum, but instead taking the result as a statement from the populace and using that to inform future reforms.
Just because advertising isn't their only revenue source doesn't mean that it wasn't intrinsic to maintaining the profitability and viability of numerous media organizations.

> And the first businesses to make money solely from advertising revenue

Strictly speaking, that means Facebook is also not using an advertising business model.
That's smart. By resigning, Cameron effectively scheduled a second referendum on the issue, aka the next election.
Societies aren't static, even when everyone is immortal.

There's also no guarantee that we have further moral progress in the future, especially when you consider the last century's two global wars.
I don't know about 'error' but there's definitely room for valid decision changes. You can take most things back within a grace period after signing the dotted line, after all.
Brits have a long* history of democracy and hold it as rather important. If article 50 hasn't been invoked by 5th November there will be riots on the streets.

* not really that long, but longer than most
It is interestingly ironic. By some analysis, the remain are indeed at conflict with what might be seen as some progressive wins by this resolution.
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/06/24/the-brexit-vo...
Just because you don't like who agrees with you doesn't mean you're making the wrong choice.
Here in Japan, street maps, in train stations, subways, are oriented according to your position looking at them. It means that North is rarely up but all over the place and I'm always confused for a wile until I remember it.
There is no such thing as a margin of error in a democratic vote, unless you mean votes which were miscounted or uncounted but that is very very unlikely to account for a 4 percentage point difference.
Given that people apparently keep changing their minds right up to voting day (indicated by polls), I think there is actually a lot of noise in the result.
Ethnic is more specific than cultural; it generally refers to a package deal that includes language, historical narratives, customs, and sometimes religion. You can speak of, for example, Cajun or Sicilian ethnicity, but you can only speak of global consumer culture.

Which is I think what the above was referring to when they said it's cultural and not ethnic; it has to do with cultural factors that cross ethnic lines.
That's assuming that people correctly know and express the opinion that they hold. Asking people directly is still somewhat of a noise signal. Also, the act of viewing the result of the vote seems to have changed people expressed opinions at least.
It also invites retaliation, like "freetard", which drags the level of the debate down to school kids taunting each other on the playground.
I suspect you've never done any fine art photography, because you would know that the skill involved in lighting an oil painting (which is technically a three dimensional work) is a technical skill that involves making creative decisions that are anything but formulaic.
While a margin of error is required for polls due to inherent limitations of accuracy and scale if your democratic institutions have a margin of error you're not doing democracy right.
Correlation vs causation.

Good programmers work on popular software because most people work on popular software.

Most security bugs are found in popular software because most people care about (use, audit, exploit) popular software.

Nothing here backs the assertion that good programmers are more likely to create more bugs per line of code written.

I'd argue that the reverse is most likely true. Good programmers know their limits, the limits of their tools, and have the experience to recognize problematic patterns.

Saying no one should try to recover from allocation failure is like saying no one should attempt surgery because only surgeons kill people occasionally during operations.
Are you saying that the only way for someone to be a "progressive" is to blindly vote on the opposite of whatever "corporations" want? That's a rather "wild" definition of progressive.
I saw an astute comment somewhere that boiled down to, "Look, it wasn't pitched as 'give us your opinion.'"

You're dead on about more serious consequences, especially in the current political environment. You have candidates in the US like Trump and Sanders basically saying to the average voter, "Look, you're being played for a sucker." Nothing would prove them right more than taking a democratic referendum and throwing out the result. It never should have happened in the first place. The original signers to the agreement should have put in provisions requiring a supermajority vote to undo membership. But the fact is it did, and they didn't. Forget about crashing markets. The idea that democracy is even functioning is under threat, and people are ready to elect authoritarians to make sure their voices are finally heard. I'm not one to make light of economic consequences--they literally ruin lives--but something bigger is at stake here. The die is cast. The consequnces of rethrowing are more perilous than letting it land.
or for job some semblance of job stability.
You misunderstand my point. I'm not talking ethics, I'm talking about recursive definitions.

You posit that tolerance is good and intolerance is bad. And you don't give good definitions for either word. That's literally begging the question.
We changed that one to the original title of the article. Is it misleading or linkbait? Those are the conditions under which it should be changed.

Arguably it is, but then the site is Stallman's, which makes the context of the advocacy unmistakeable. Also the verbal twist of "use, (i.e. be used by)" is marginally gratifying of curiosity in its own right, and not the same thing as the usual clickbait. So IMO that title squeaks by as ok.

Obviously different editors would call some of these differently, but that's not the same thing as arbitrarily changing the rules. The rule is pretty fixed.
His resignation does not trigger an election, if that is what you meant, but the selection of a new prime minister by the Conservatives.
Sure it might not be a clear mandate, and I think it was a stupid bet to make, but it met the condition set and they were very clear before the vote what would happen.

Normally it might not be that big a deal but it exists in the context of people frustrated with the EU and politics in general for being "undemocratic" and supposedly not listening to them. In this particular case by ignoring the result of it, you would potentially be validating those fears, and play into euro-skeptic views across the whole of Europe.
Independent reinvention is not in general a defense to a claim of patent infringement. Is there some fairly specific set of circumstances you're referring to here?
> The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50? Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

This comment ignores ideology. For diehard anti-eu supporters triggering Article 50 isn't some grave decision. They don't care about the ramifications and consequences (or more distinctly, they don't agree that they will be bad). Maybe Boris and Farage really didn't want to win, but that doesn't really matter, they did and their party will force them to follow through on it.