skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I cringe when I see articles such as this, leading research universities will always be superior to "teaching" schools. Not only is conducting quantitative research far more difficult than teaching, the research garners prestige and leads to higher rankings which attracts a more intelligent and ambitious student body. Ultimately the real value of a degree comes from the networking and signaling ability granted by it, I can always learn on my own by working through textbooks or reading journal articles. What I'd really like out of a university experience is to befriend people who will be starting innovative companies or researchers publishing in top journals.
There's no hard and fast rule (in fact the last vote was a little controversial; some claimed that it wouldn't be binding on the UK as a whole). At the time people were saying at least 5 years and more like 10 until a new vote.

The SNP's absolute dominance slipped a little in the last Scottish election, making a quick followup referendum less likely. But this new result will put it right back on the agenda.
Floyd–Warshall Algorithm
Was immigration policy the only factor driving people's votes? Do you believe that over 50% of the UK population harbors ill will towards immigrant populations? What about the democratic arguments against the European Commission or the arguments against protectionist trade barriers? To distill the entire vote into a single issue is foolish.

I think it's easy to say that immigration and underlying racism or xenophobia were the cause for the result if you don't agree with the result. Comparing 5% of Australian voters electing Pauline Hanson is a far stretch considering that one vote was a general election, the other was a referendum and one result was 5% of the population and the other is over 50%.

Anecdotes of some campaigners citing Australia's immigration policy is not a strong enough argument to refute other fundamental issues that went into people's votes and is not proof of "Yet another example that immigration policy trumps pretty well all other concerns".
Yes it is an easy buy. Wait a few days and get options to buy GBP @1.5 USD :-)
This would be fantastic!
Perhaps in a perfectly fair and free economy ... such as in a collective group of countries that all trade freely with each other. That may now be over. Britain still needs cars and, unable to produce them locally, may well tolerate the higher prices.
Correlation is not causation.
The fact no wars between EU members happened (yet) during the existence of the EU is note necessarily caused by the existence or the very nature of the EU.

Also given the recent proceedings in the course of the EU all member countries are better off with the whole house of cards collapsing. We can always build a new alliance, but this USSR style direction is not the least promising.

Take a look at the Greek, what a success the EU was for them. Take a look at the handling of the Greek dept problem, how well the EU reagated to that. Take a look at the migrant crisis: the western EU members criticized Hungary for defending its borders, which it is obliged to by the schengen treaty. The leaders did not play by the rules they have set, yet they talk about more centralization should do the trick.

The European Council is not elected by the people, and is not accountable. Also does not show ability to control this imbecile of a superpower.

This EU must die for its architectural problems. Just as the USSR had to die. I beleive this will also happen without violence, as there is no common military force under the control of the "leaders".

I also beleive, that the European people, even those voting leave, have a wish to be united. But maybe some beleive we are first British, and second European, and they do not wish to sacrafice their local values for some abstract European or global values. Yet they do not feel bad about the other Europeans.

Europe has longer, and different history than the USA, and most importantly, though often forgotten, most European nations have made huge saccrifices for their freedom, for their very existence as a nation.

In short, to save the EU: "everything must change so that everything can stay the same"
Considering what parts of the UK preferred to stay and which preferred to leave, I wonder if overall the way to give the most people what they want would have been to leave the UK in the EU but have England leave the UK.
Unfortunately, this is the argument that won the day. 25 years of tabloid brainwashing has irreparably damaged UK public opinion.

Yes, there was a democratic deficit in the original EU structure. It was addressed in the 2009 treaty, and it keeps getting addressed with more and more decision-making powers slowly moving from Commission to Parliament. But it's too late, people think Bruxelles decides banana sizes and we can't have that.

Unsurprisingly, who was among the first journalists starting the whole "crazy bruxelles" meme? One Boris Johnson.
I think Sandworm's comment is not really sensible. Most people surely buy on some price to quality benchmark, i.e. value. If German cars are suddenly x% more expensive, well that will have a big impact. Not to mention US/Japanese/French cars being perfectly decent!
The largest importer of champange in the world? UK. Not per capita either... just the largest, in front of the US. The UK has a ton of money for luxuries and all kinds of things that the healthier economies of the EU desperately want access to.
Yeah, leaving the EU is totally going to unseat socialism in the UK and remove the unelected bureaucracy that Yes, Minister made so famous in the early '80s...

... and I'm not sure how Brexit will affect the Russian-ness of the UK's prostitutes, give that Russia is not part of the EU, EEC, Schengen, or even EFTA...
Populism is seen as bad by people who think "Let's beat those guys up, not necessarily because they did something bad or deserve it, but just because we're angry and want to beat someone" is a bad idea.
They just peacefully voted to leave it, so yes.
No they threatened. Obama threatened the UK of no trade deal. France threatened to flood eurotunnel with migrants. Germany threatened of no trade agreement. People, and Brits in particular, always respond to threats the same way: "fuck you!"
So, your argument against charges of racism is that you voted to leave the EU simply because you felt there were too many kielbasa places in London?!? Kind of an overreaction, don't you think?
> Polish kielbasa shops in London

Why do you need separate shops for kielbasa? Here in the US east coast, kielbasa is sold in normal supermarkets along with other sausages.
Can I ask why? The public spoke in completely free and democratic manner, against everything so called "experts" said. I thought this was a staple of being British?
is there anything structural about the deal that would allow this?

even bill gates was ousted from microsoft as chairman[1]. Of course, by then he held only 4.5% of the $277B company, so he was only its single largest shareholder and only held about $12 billion in Microsoft stock, a pittance.

if anyone is serious about stubbornly sticking with their perspective, they need to have the structure in place to do so, in my opinion. regardless, good luck going forward: it's bound to be a good outcome for you.

[1] http://www.idigitaltimes.com/bill-gates-fired-microsoft-inve...
Alan Kay on the misunderstanding of OOP (1998)
I've heard yesterday that the referendum itself is non-binding, and that Parliament is still in charge of the final decision.

Further Parliamentary lawmakers are supposedly mostly pro-Remain, so given the slim margin of victory it's not clear what will ultimately happen.
Not so sure on this one: one thing that the UK is an example of is its respect for democracy. I hope the parliament accepts this non-binding vote, and take the necessary steps to swiftly break with the EU.

We in the EU can then proceed unhindered.
This is already happening, the UK leaving is a symptom of that.

By the logic of your parent posters the UK wouldn't have left because of Greece, which has been used to set an example last year.
It's technically a non binding referendum, and the UK is not a direct democracy. And you can't have something other than FPTP for a two choice decision. Unless you raise the barrier for change.
That's simply because UK Tories decided their euroskepticism prevented them from joining their natural allies in the EPP.

It's like Northen Irish people voting Sinn Fein were complaining that they don't actually sit in Westminster.
I chose Colemak about 8 months ago after a bunch of research and haven't looked back. Some important things, beyond the ease metrics:

- Don't move too many keys that are used for hotkeys: zxcv qw h a are not moved.

- Let me move around vim in a sane way. hjkl are kind of a reach now, but they are all under my left index.

- Make sure my `readline` hotkeys are easy to read. a r f b n p y u are all good. g is a bit of a stretch.

- It's common enough that I don't have to install custom software on every computer I use. It's on OSX and in the firmware of many mechanical keyboards.

qwerty is garbage, and it's a real shame that it's here to stay, and I feel bad that I had to 'settle' for a layout that has some keys borrowed, but I am a realistic more than an idealistic and colemak definitely still hits on the important points for me.
>>> I've seen actual self-driving cars on actual roads.

No you haven't. You've seen supervised cars with pilots ready to take over when needed. No manufacturer yet has dared release a truly hand-and-eyes-free vehicle onto public roads.
>I think they announced that the panning/zooming issue is resolved with the Apple Maps in iOS10.

I wish this were the case. I'm running the iOS 10 beta on a 6S+ and gave Maps several seconds to load this area of upstate NY.

http://i.imgur.com/wi7HRqe.jpg

The dark gray grid persists. Yea, it's the first beta, but I have mostly only noticed changes in the interface and not the actual map data.
Just for comparison: to pass a US Constitutional Amendment, it requires consent of 2/3 of both houses of Congress and ratification by 3/4 of all US states. Treaties require consent of the President and 2/3 of the Senate.
Poland and most other Eastern European Economies got a huge boost by access to the Common Market.
I was reading this today and a quote stood out.

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

>"When goods cannot cross borders, armies will."

I think it would be interesting to see how many protectionist schemes have lead to wars vs. free trade.
Nokia marketed ghastly resistive touchscreens running Maemo for years (at least from 2005 to 2011).
What about those that were joined against their will?

Politics is violence: 51% vs 49%
Well, we now already have a lot less, given how far the pound has tumbled.
No political flamewars, please.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11966471 and marked it off-topic.
And the 100 year cycle is in full effect.
Sad times ...
It's not completely one-sided, it's rarely black and white. But you can't seriously say that they are on equal footing when trying to do trade agreements. The GBP has taken a nosedive already...
Dublin is by no means a 'backwater' - Google and Facebook's EU headquarters both sit in Dublin, as well as large outposts of a number of global financial institutions. There's a lot going on in Dublin, not to speak of its history, accessibility, and affordability compared to the canonical 'tech hubs'.

Let's not forget that there are many engineers who don't live in the Bay Area, NYC or London, for whom Dublin may be quite attractive. And while it may not be on the level of those three regions, it has a lot going for it in its' own right.
Why whiteboard interviews are a terrible way to judge people
Yes, interesting that the prediction markets got this quite wrong as well.
That's even worse, he's jeopardizing the perk of contractors being extended that privilege.
Well I wanted to keep it more hypothetical to avoid offense - if we can agree in theory then that's enough for me. If we disagree that religion can be sharply criticized in any case then the data doesn't matter. It's also HN so I'm trying to be a bit more cautious; dang has been gracious enough not to kill the thread outright.

Here's Pew Research on the topic[1] I'm going off. According to this, 74% of Egyptian Muslims favour sharia. Of those, 81% support stoning for adultery, and 86% for death for apostasy. Egypt has 80M Muslims, so that's around 50M people in one country alone, that believe in death for leaving the religion.

I'm not saying anyone should be punished. Just that some groups, overall, seem to have many members with views opposite what the country wants. Is this not a fair subject to discuss when talking about integrating hundreds of thousands, or millions of people, into another country?

I am uncomfortable with a blanket ban on a particular religion, because it's not accurate enough. But to pretend there's absolutely no signal at all doesn't seem good either. I'm don't agree we should just assume everyone will put such extreme personal views aside.

Thank you for excusing my poor phrasing.

1: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religi...
It seems to be a pretty common stance taken by democratic political parties across history.
So the original comment in this post chain wasn't racist? Okay.
> Complete and utter madness.

Because Britain left?

And the response to this madness of leaving is to also leave?
I wonder the role of the US in this.
They get their own football teams because the requirement to be a sovereign nation didn't exist when their teams formed and they are grandfathered in.
That argument only applies in locations that have such systems.
Hi, nice idea, but what kind of source do you use to enrich data?
In case anyone is wondering why you would use a CG car instead of a real car: The purpose of this vehicle is to allow large feature films to shoot with the Blackbird and sell a product-placed vehicle in post-production to the highest bidder. It's a brilliant way to maximize the value of the placement.

The Mill obviously doesn't spell this out in their press release. But this is all about native advertising.
Unless you were to differentiate between citizens and residents.
While it's not legally binding it would be political suicide for the government to go against the referendum. There's zero chance of them doing that.
> The point is that the HN article title is wrong and deceptive

Hardly. Britain has voted. The result of the vote is that Britain will leave the EU. The fact that the votes haven't been counted to 100% doesn't make that fact any less the case. Statistics work.
In Germany we've been waiting for the Bavarian exit for decades now :)
Let's see how it plays out, I suspect when the dust settles many of the current schemes will remain under a different name.
What socialist countries, pray tell? The German chancellor is from the right. Spanish PM, same. France has an extremely unpopular socialist president who will be voted out very soon. The Italian government is nominally centre-left but has moved to the right in recent years.

Socialism in Europe died in the '90s. What we have now are right-wing neoliberal elites trashing the place that social-democrats built in the '70s and '80s.
Agreed. They'd be wrong if they made a bunch of 25% predictions and the 25% predictions happened more than 1/4 times.
Backing up my response with a snippet from the BBC's referendum FAQ :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

Could MPs block an EU exit if Britain votes for it?

Michael, from East Sussex asks an intriguing question - could the necessary legislation pass the Commons if all SNP and Lib Dems, nearly all Labour and many Conservative MPs were in favour of staying?

The answer is that technically MPs could block an EU exit - but it would be seen as political suicide to go against the will of the people as expressed in a referendum. The referendum result is not legally binding - Parliament still has to pass the laws that will get Britain out of the 28 nation bloc, starting with the repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act.

The withdrawal agreement would also have to be ratified by Parliament - the House of Lords and/or the Commons could vote against ratification, according to a House of Commons library report.

It adds: "If the Commons resolves against ratification, the treaty can still be ratified if the Government lays a statement explaining why the treaty should nonetheless be ratified and the House of Commons does not resolve against ratification a second time within 21 days (this process can be repeated ad infinitum)."

In practice, Conservative MPs who voted to remain in the EU would be whipped to vote with the government. Any who defied the whip would have to face the wrath of voters at the next general election.

One scenario that could see the referendum result overturned, is if MPs forced a general election and a party campaigned on a promise to keep Britain in the EU, got elected and then claimed that the election mandate topped the referendum one. Two thirds of MPs would have to vote for a general election to be held before the next scheduled one in 2020.
I know of at least one major investment bank that internally has told staff they will move their head office out of London.
There is a grace period, especially since the UK hasn't even started the formal process of leaving, yet. Parliament will also need to decide on this.

There is only one scenario without a grace period: some more radical Brexit supporters advocate breaking EU laws and regulations immediately (right to work and live and so on), just because the European courts take their time and by the time they'd hear the case the UK would already have left, so no consequences.

In that case some European politicians have replied there will be an immediate cutoff from the Common Market.

Both threats are highly unlikely to be played out, IMO.
This correlates with XE.com currency converter website being down at the moment. Probably due to the pound value fluctuating...
Pretty much - we have the same thing in New Zealand, but one of the dynamics we see here (I don't know if you get the same in Germany) is a huge hostility from the old left parties to the new left parties - there's an arrogant assumption that those voters "belong" to the old left, and a lot of derision directed at them (I guess a not dissimilar dynamic to the Clinton/Sanders split).
Japan, Germany, Italy ... I think we can all agree they make better cars than anything produced by a British manufacturer in recent decades.

US cars are strange. I often find the European versions of US models to be miles better than those produced for the US market. So it's hard to decide what exactly is an American car.
Yes I read it, and your example I covered when I said be biased on the correct things. Not all people alter their bias but part of the problem with this article is its generalities that dont apply to everyone but are written about like they do.
The idea is to find any storage devices you hid when they serve a warrant, not to do spot checks for porn. It doesn't matter if the dog finds your car keys or the TV remote you lost in the couch, if it eventually finds your stash of illegal music or that video tape you forgot to take back to Blockbuster that they're trying to bust you for.
so what you're saying is that the Scots shouldn't be upset that the Tories have 100% of the power as the SNP haven't joined the Conservative party?

the situation is identical
It will officially take two years to leave once the process has started, which it has not been yet (that's what the Prime Minister declares). Whether or not you subsequently have to pay import taxes after Britain has left is also something that will have to be negotiated.
And then we place tarrifs on all French goods.

French know this will happen, so they don't do that.
Maybe the OP is Scottish?

Scotland had a pretty clear Remain vote.
GDP's not perfect, but that should hint at a number of things. Look also at Organic Inflation, and Debt Ratio. Unless the UK governments to come take much worse decisions than the EU bureaucrats, it should not be too difficult to do better.
Why? 25% is a very significant chunk.

You'd expect the 25% option to happen more often than just now and then.

25% of the time, actually.
Bottom line, UK citizens are represented in the European Parliament, and have a say in EU legislation. If there is a majority in a democratic parliament, well, so be it, democracy works this way... and if the Conservative party decided not to join the EPP, that's the party's decision.

It's a logical fallacy to say that "the country's laws were decided by politicians the people did not elect.", when indeed they are elected by the people.
Yeah - or at least 50% of the population vs 50% of the turnout.
Samsung announces Notebook 7 spin
Look at Greek? You know why greeks were in situation in which they ended? Because this was their own fault, they had 18 gardeners employed in one of their local government building on payroll but only one was needed. They paid all government employees bonus for coming to work on time, bonus for washing hands, bonus for being all day in work. Then they made "creative books" which made this disaster from the eyes of others.

> The European Council is not elected by the people, and is not accountable.

European Council is not elected by people? Please read more about EU before claiming such things which are not true - "The European Council is the institution of the European Union (EU) that comprises the heads of state or government of the member states, along with President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission."
The EU will not want to (give the UK a good deal) but for each trade area there will be a member state suffering if they won't.

The negotiations themselves may prove a good catalyst for further disarray.
Scotland coming back to the EU would be great, but not easy, since lots of EU countries would be willing to prevent it in order to make an example for their own separatist regions (Catalonia / Basque Country in Spain, for example)
> Australia and New Zealand will too

Good for Australia and New Zealand. But the ANZAC future stopped being British when they surrendered Singapore.

> Hopefully, this will result in a reinvigorated Anglosphere.

Why hopefully?
Avoiding graphic artifacts makes sense, but I'm going to bet on conspiracy, probably involving the Masons.
I think they are saying advertising itself is the zero sum game....not this particular modification to it. (and I don't agree advertising is a zero sum game, I think it is a very, very small number sum game :) )
That may be so, but - at the risk of sounding like a 'Brexiter' - at least the UK has its own currency! It can be devalued. The UK has that control and can be competitive. What would happen to one of the EU countries if it voted leave but had the Euro?
> Germany makes better cars than anyone else

Sure. Like those excellent Volkswagon diesel vehicles that are vastly more efficient than their Japanese competitors.

Edit: I thought my sarcasm would be clear. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
You're stating a statistical prediction as a fact. If you're happy doing that then so be it...
How much champagne will England be buying when the City decamps to Frankfurt?
Fair enough. I was just poking fun at the EU, no harm intended.
This is not direct democracy. This referendum is not legally binding. In theory, the government could ignore this result. However, all major parties have stated they would follow the result.

There will be discussion about how soon to file the request to leave, though (actually, that is being discussed on the BBC right now. Problem is that the rules say that, after the request is made, a country must leave within two years. It may be smarter to make sure one can comply with that schedule before formally applying for an exit. Also, they were talking about timing the formal request w.r.t. upcoming elections in France and Germany)