skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your examples are not applicable because, as far as I understand it, they would have to implement additional features to allow for same-sex matches. There's no "no gays allowed" code on their site. Your examples are examples of active exclusion, while this is a case of missing inclusion.

I don't think it's right to force them to implement this additional code. If they had active anti-homosexual code it would be a different matter though.
Surprisingly strong opinions on world politics, without much evidence.

I have the utmost sympathy for the plight of the chronically ill, but to decree a referendum result as "madness" is slightly egotistical.

Perhaps those who are outraged by world events merely don't see the full picture? Perhaps their protective shells work too well, and they are insulated from the reality with which the masses must contend?

Worth pondering.
Oh no. That's a perfect example of the crap I'm talking about. (rubs fingers against forehead)
my name is JENNY, i am from {TEXAS, USA) i want to use this possible means to appreciate one man i hold in sincere gratitude and high esteem for his help and his kindness he has rendered to me.this is the reason why i have taken it upon myself to thank this great spell caster called Dr.MEGA because through his help my life became more filled with love and i am happy to say that my ex lover who has been separated from me for the past weeks came back to me pleading for acceptance from me, this was a shocking event because before i contacted Dr.Mega i was the one begging my ex lover to come back to me but through the assistance of Dr.Mega i now have my relationship restored. you can also have a better relationship only if you contact:drmegaspelltemple@hotmail.com or drmegaspelltemple@gmail.com and i’ll always be grateful to Dr.Mega email him for any kind of help and he is capable and reliable for help.... you can also call him on +2348117381549 or his website http://drmegaspelltemple.wix.com/drmega
A little more in this link posted to hn a while back:

"The Real “No-Go Zone” of France: A Forbidden No Man’s Land Poisoned by War"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9609091
http://www.messynessychic.com/2015/05/26/the-real-no-go-zone...
Meanwhile, a large percentage of the population is quite happy to play a game named Grand Theft Auto...
I read this article, puzzled, thinking ... Amazon provides the list price? How haven't I noticed? I had to do an image search to remind me of an example of that. Of course, once I saw the page, I understood what they were referring to but apparently my brain has been filtering that part of the page due to years of conditioning.

For all practical purposes, the list price on American e-commerce sites is a worthless bit of information on a product page. I don't think in somewhere around 20 years of purchasing things online and from catalogs I've ever paid anything close to list price and I've never felt like I got a "good deal" simply because the gap between list and actual was large. In fact, I'd probably be disinclined to purchase a product with too large a gap between list and actual, making the assumption that something must be horribly wrong if they're trying to get rid of the thing at such a steep discount.

Though I'm very glad this deceptive practice is being targeted, if only from the perspective of eliminating one more useless bit of noise from product pages (can we also filter out the two word reviews?), I'd imagine very few people[0] actually believe that price represents a realistic product price for 99% of products[1].

[0] In the US this is a ridiculously common practice with the worst offenders being auto dealers. They'll list MSRP along-side a nearly impossible to qualify-for manufacturer incentives (unless you're active military, employee of the brand, have the brand's credit card points maxed out, are a previous owner of the brand ... in one case I discovered the discounts couldn't actually be combined making the deal truly impossible)

[1] About the only time this is true is when the product provider has a minimum advertised price requiring an extra step to see the price only once the item is in your cart (somehow, that's a loop hole?). Or Apple products...
Maybe he shouldn't have used the term "economies of scale", instead using "economies of scope", which he does use. Do you agree with his point about diseconomies of scope?
This is fantastic. Now all you have to do is add a share button and an extension to the site being shared to. Imagine if all status updates where PGP encrypted, what a wonderful world that would be.
I don't know anything about the law in question, but if it's only about protecting minorities, it creates the situation where gay-only sites are lawful, while hetero-only sites are illegal. I think that's pretty bad.
For myself, I think a good way to think of science is to consider the universe as a program, and that scientists are doing black box reverse engineering.

We attempt to reverse engineer the mathematical logic of the universe based on observations, and once we think we have the mathematical "source code", we do experiments which compare the outputs of the source code (our mathematical models) with the outputs of the universe given the same set of inputs.

There is even the analog of refactoring where a better overall "architecture" can dramatically simplify the "source code". An example would be the move from Ptolemy and epicycles to the heliocentric view of Copernicus and Kepler that greatly simplifies the "code" for planetary motions.

In addition, just like when you test a function, extreme inputs can reveal bugs. Relativity and quantum mechanics came about in this manner. We had the Newtonion "source code" and it seemed to work very well in that the output of our source code matched the output of the universe for all values that we were able to supply as input. Then it became possible to measure the universe's outputs for velocities near the speed of light and masses that were subatomic. We then realized that our reverse engineered "source code" and the universe gave divergent answers. Based on this, Einstein rewrote the reverse engineered source code in such a way that it was both very elegant and matched the universe for velocities near the speed of light while still passing all the Newtonian unit tests.

Bohr et al, wrote code, that matched the universe's output when feeling with subatomic particles.

Unfortunately, while both the Einstein's code and Bohr's code both give correct answers, there is a giant if statement that governs whether we call Einstein or Bohr.

Having that giant if statement and separate Einstein and Bohr functions is seen as not elegant and scientists have been trying to write a single function that gets rid of the if statement and still passes the Einstein and Bohr unit tests. This is called "grand unification".

This model, at least for software people like me makes a lot of sense. For example, just like a unit test that fails gives you far more information than one that passes, so an experiment that diverges from the expected value of our current "source code" can tell us in which way our source code needs to be refined.
> But since they also prefer Gore to Bush they have to approve of Gore or else Bush may win.

Only the Gore voters have to do the same thing, and then Nader wins if he has more support. Because a small percentage of people will vote only for their preferred candidate and risk Bush, which will be proportional to the support that candidate has and thus give Nader the win if he actually has more support.

The thing you're really objecting to is why range voting is better than approval voting. With range voting the Nader supporters can give Nader 10, Gore 9 and Bush 0, the Gore voters swap Gore and Nader and then there is less brinkmanship necessary to get the right outcome. But that's the cost of using the one which is easier to explain. And range voting is more complicated than approval voting, but it's simpler than IRV, so you're really just making the argument for range voting over approval voting.

I feel like the trap you're falling into is to grade approval voting based on whether it does what IRV does.

The problem with IRV is that it tends to do crazy things. So for example, imagine everybody expects that in a runoff between Bush and Nader, Bush wins. But between Bush and Gore, Gore wins. So then people who would vote for Nader can't vote for him because it would give the election to Bush again. But even weirder, Bush voters can vote for Nader in order to give the election to Bush. So IRV doesn't solve the most important problem, because people will still be clamoring for third parties not to run and for people not to vote for them for fear that they'll harm the major party most similar to them.
The article makes no mention of the data being adjusted for inflation.

If you don't adjust housing prices for inflation, you can expect that the number of homes priced above $1M will rise by some steady percentage each year even if their value in inflation-adjusted dollars remains constant. Over a few years, this will push a lot of average homes over the $1M mark (which is a completely arbitrary number anyway). Over time, a $1M house becomes less and less "expensive".
Fascinating technology. I wonder what the current hand-wringing over helium shortages would have looked like in a world where cryotrons became the dominant computing element.
Yep. Small products from Apple like chargers and cables, HP inkjet cartridges, and other things where I'd prefer to have the original product for safety or performance reasons, are impossible to buy from Amazon.

Every seller insists it's "Genuine HP" in factory sealed cartons and...it's not. The same thing happens with pens. Cheap knock-offs, every time. Reading the reviews on Amazon is unhelpful, because the reviews are polluted with apparently deliberate misinformation. It's got to the point where I either order Apple chargers from Apple directly or go to one of their retail stores in person, and I always buy inkjet cartridges in person. (I don't like fires and I don't like clogged inkjet nozzles.)

Amazon is great for lots of things, but not small, easily counterfeited, safety critical items.
I suppose a better synopsis would have been that there may be a set of injuries that result from physical trauma to the brain, that can be conflated with war-induced PTSD. But as people that suffer trauma without serious head injuries exhibit some of the same traits as those that are associated with PTSD, it's not really about PTSD in general being physical (as in result of external physical trauma, as opposed to physical changes in the brain, which can often result from eg: depression "alone").

But it is certainly interesting that "just" being subject to such physical abuse could lead to conditions similar to that of PTSD.
I took one class in the philosophy of science in college, and feel qualified to smugly dismiss the article.

The article makes the point that knowing what something is and defining it are different. He then repeats that claim about 55 times, and says nothing else about science at all, certainly nothing about attempting to define the scientific method.

(I don't really want to spend time arguing about Popper or Lakatos here. But that's not relevant to the content of the article at all.)
Kip Irvine's assembly language textbook is pretty good, as I recall:

http://kipirvine.com/asm/

At least one guy in our class used Linux tools to work through the chapters we studied, although the instructions are focused on VS.
Replying to myself: On Ubuntu Xenial you have to start Docker with this additional flag:

--exec-opt native.cgroupdriver=cgroupfs

Since Xenial uses systemd, there's no longer an /etc/default/docker. Instead, create /etc/systemd/system/docker.service.d/docker.conf with:

[Service]
ExecStart=
ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker daemon --exec-opt native.cgroupdriver=cgroupfs --iptables=false --bridge=cbr0 --ip-masq=false
I have to hand it to you on Beowulf example. I remember learning about that in our literature class along with descriptions of Old, Middle and New English. Or something like that. What jumped out at me was how Old English looked German or something quite different from "English" as I was taught. Everyone in the class abhorred it as "not English." Turns out, our ancestors could've made the same gripes about our "dialect of English" that people are making about AAVE. Tripped me out.
AWS is a computing service built on "datacenters" located all around the world, which are large warehouses packed tightly with racks of computers that are networked together and efficiently powered and cooled.

I'm missing a description of virtual machines / containers but that might be going into too much detail.
Because many philosophers of science reject Popper's views as unrepresentative of the way science is done by real people in the real world. The Wikipedia page for falsifiability enumerates some of these criticisms.
That's a silly response. Amazon is an online retailer, they are the absolute most vulnerable to cross shopping. If I'm at a local grocery store or farmer's market and see something I like I'm much more likely to buy it there since I'm already there.

If I'm shopping for something on Amazon it takes basically zero time to look at what the price is on Costco, PC Part Picker, my local stores, etc. and be sure I'm getting the best deal. I'm not a compulsive shopper who just buys things instantly when I see them.
"all of the knowledge" is a huge part of AI. The bigger the datasets, the better results you have from machine learning, and it's a trivial thing for AI to absorb huge amounts of information. What humans find difficult, computers can do easily and it's usually vice-versa for stuff like pattern recognition, creativity.
Looks like a good space for Amazon Basics to expand into.

In fact they already have: https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Performance-Alkaline-Bat...
The candy Japan fraud was due to fraudsters using the service to test a stolen credit card to see if it worked. Bitcoin doesn't have that problem.

The story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11431881
Tesla and Google Take Different Roads to Self-Driving Car
One way in which Swift is higher-level is in its support for dynamic constructs. For example, Swift allows you to dynamically check protocol conformance (e.g. in generics). I believe Rust does not allow this.
Last year we shared https://towit.io - no HN love but we did receive international press and to this day a slow but steady pace of new users.

Was a traumatising year of highs and lows, 6/10.

* Edited for readability.
Erich Maria Remarque on his book, All Quiet on the Western Front:
"This book is to be neither an accusation nor a confession, and least of all an adventure, for death is not an adventure to those who stand face to face with it. It will try simply to tell of a generation of men who, even though they may have escaped (its) shells, were destroyed by the war."

By reducing the suffering of those who partook in WWI to an adventure we insult all those who were destroyed by war.
What being crap at wood carving taught me about perfection
Not all of us 40somethings got into tech when we were 20.
Because falsifiability is not part of how most science is done. Most scientists design experiments to verify hypotheses, not to falsify/refute them.

The relationship between Karl Popper's idealized scientific method, and science as it is actually practiced, is rather tenuous. Many people who study the scientific method reject Popper's views, although many of the commenters here seem to think that Popper had the final word on the subject.

The reality is that science is done by people, and human culture and prejudice, including ego and groupthink, are common in science. This is why some scientists don't like to consider submissions of articles that fail to replicate previous experiments. It's a problem for peer review more broadly.
Chris Evans to step down as Top Gear presenter
Yeah, exactly. St. Paul and New York City have more in common with each other than either do with rural communities in their own states.
> design a test to disprove the hypothesis

That's not what scientists normally do. Popper argued that they should do it, not that they actually do it. Many experiments are designed to verify hypotheses, not to falsify them.
I previously submitted this earlier today. Here's the link for YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdmHHpAsMVw
It's been really great being able to stream in HD on my Chromecast :)
Unfortunately, university lecturers in many subjects, including mathematics, are often doing that job only because they have to as part of their main research position, not because they actually want to or have any aptitude for it. There are some great lecturers who are happy exceptions, but they are few and far between in my experience.

The sooner traditional universities and their ineffective, anachronistic teaching practices die out as the main form of tertiary academic education, the better. They could be replaced tomorrow by some combination of recorded lectures given by presenters who are actually good and in-person tuition given by people who can actually teach and care about their students' education, and I suspect absolutely nothing of value would be lost. The students would be both better educated and probably much better off financially, while the academics with a talent for research but not for teaching could make better use of their time and skills.
Isn't that what AWS built with KMS which is super scalable and cheap? It is currently listed as pending approval/under review on NIST's 140-2 product list?
wait for a CVE
Yes.

This is one of the reasons why I wish Google implemented aliases for accounts anchored to a UID instead of requiring a persistent user account name. This is how Microsoft does it, actually. Then there might be a way to control for accounts that have similar names.
I do it all the time, no social issues. Good coworkers?
Hey - I use Cachet for one of my web apps. Great product, and I love it. Thanks for building!
> that suffer trauma without serious head injuries

You didn't read or you didn't understand the article.

The injuries they are talking about are invisible unless you put the brain under a microsocope.
Ok I think I'm with you. Thank you for this actually. I really appreciate it. Range voting doesn't seem that bad. People are used to taking surveys. I have failed many times to explain IRV and this does seem to have the same benefit. Also brinkmanship is an awesome word that I did not know.
Regrets on deathbeds are kind of a myth. Most people did actually make the conscious choices throughout their lives not to do the things they regret when things are over. So i would not give it too much credence unless their life is cut very short when they barely had a chance to do anything.
Stylish Lady with Cartoons Blouse – The Emporialist│ Street Fashion Magazine
1 million $ still has a ring to it that people remember as being associated to wealth.

You are of course correct, but 1M$ to most people is still a very large number.

What's more disturbing is how flat wages are in comparison for non-tech people, and given rent increases that are also going up, most aver gage people will never afford a home at this rate.
Hey Pieter; thanks. Wish you the best for however long you're around. I hope you can make limbo work for as long as it lasts.
It seems the main point being made by the article is that even if you are going to teach principles, it can be more effective to start by giving some context and motivation before getting into the detailed technical explanations. Deriving results from first principles may well result in better understanding than simply learning results and proofs by rote, but it's still useful to have some indication of why those principles might be useful and relevant as well.
Lots of genres involve math compositionally, and some for performance - mathrock, jazz, some classical compositions, even pop music, it's definitely necessary to properly comprehend a piece. Let alone if you're going to try anything with polyrhythms, tackle anything beyond basic harmonic theory, or have an interest in understanding the physics behind sound..
Fear of the Sky (WebVR)
I am upset in the intellectual sense, not the physical.

There is no discussion to be had. You are wrong. If you cannot accept the basic fact that any concept can be translated into any language (efficiency notwithstanding) then fine, just don't pretend you want to engage in "civilised discussion".

Confrontation is not a personal attack. The arguments you gave (and still support) are evidence of someone who is either trolling or has not seen the world. Honest question: do you speak/read multiple languages?
I remember hand grenade day in Army basic training, and at the time what struck me was that the grenades going off looked and sounded like what artillery does in the movies. Spine-jarring explosions, 25-foot-tall clouds of dirt and smoke, etc. Later on (at air defense school, for some reason) we did a claymore mine at one of our live fire events, and it was far, far louder and vicious than the POP and shower of sparks that Hollywood would have given us. I can't even imagine what it would be like to be near a real artillery round landing.
Almost exactly a year ago, I posted my side-project Faqt (https://www.faqt.co) and I’m happy to say that it’s still going strong to this day. In fact, we not only have users, but we are doing our biggest ever release in a few weeks.

Originally, I posted Faqt as a personal knowledge base and it spent most of the day on the front page and led us to currently having a couple thousand users and a few well-known startups beta testing our team accounts. In a few weeks, we are re-launching Faqt as a team knowledge base. If anyone wants to get notified when we do our big release, feel free to email me at hello@faqt.co and we’ll make sure to get you guys in. We’re really excited for what’s coming next and a lot of that is due to the Hacker News community and the fantastic feedback we've been getting throughout the last year. Thanks guys - you’ve been awesome!
Moving essay.
> Lesson is: take your medicine. It may hurt, yet the alternative will hurt more.

There is something I've recently realized. Hospitals are optimized to receive patients, control the situation, prevent pain & death, and then hope for the best. In other words, traditional medicine doesn't actually heal you. It only controls the situation, and trusts that your body will heal itself.

This was a strange realization to make. My whole life I've always associated medicine with healing. But now I see that, although very useful, medicine only serves as a band-aid. It doesn't solve the underlying problem.

I think we as a society need to realize this. Not because traditional medicine is bad (it has helped save countless lives, for sure), but because we need to start looking into alternative medicine that could potentially provide actual healing. There's currently a stigma of anything that isn't a traditional drug / pill... we need to progress past this mindset.

Edit: Sorry for being overly broad. I have more in mind physical and mental health conditions. Regardless, instead of downvotes, how about we have an enlightening discussion?

Edit 2: I misspoke "traditional medicine"; but what I meant was "western medicine", as I was kindly corrected by maxerickson. I apologize for the confusion.
As someone who's been on both sides of the fence, any theories on how they manage to find people to work in cooking, sometimes with really high skill levels, for such long hours for relatively horrible pay?

I mean some I know are very intelligent people, and extremely good at what they do, but make like $50k working 60+ hours per week. It's insane.