skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Almost all the weird spikes in the SF crime data are data issues, not real crime trends. If you're naive about it you'll get to the conclusion that one spot in SOMA along Bryant is the crime capital of SF, except that's just where the Hall of Justice is where tons of crimes get geolocated to. That doesn't mean they actually happened there. Same thing for many of the police stations and hospitals throughout the city. The top 5 locations in the data aren't "real". The fact that Monday, the 1st of every month, and Jan 1 are the maxes too doesn't strike me as legit.

The article mentions some of this, that "It could also be an effect of how this data is collected". That's my guess for every insight in this article.
It's also been discussed that they're using WebP instead of the older JPG / PNG formats in Chrome Store / Hangouts / etc.

https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/07/google-now-uses-its-own-we...
The cop who gives you a ticket probably doesn't care about your Vox articles, Maclolm-Gladwell-grade pseudo statistics, or these comments.

At least in the Bay Area, cops are definitely willing to take the time to ticket cyclists. In Los Gatos where I live, the police will sometimes take a Saturday and just watch a busy intersection and literally ticket EVERY cyclist who blows through.

Of course we have also had a few cycling fatalities here, always the same story:cyclists blowing through intersections.

Don't do it. Don't be the asshole who makes life more difficult for other cyclists. No one cares about your bogus statistical arguments.
Spurned recruiter sues candidate using recorded phone call as evidence
I'm surprised that Bloomberg failed to account for inflation in their comparisons. Amazon's 1.4 Billion loss in 2000 is almost exactly 2 Billion in today's dollars (1,956,479,674.80 according to http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/). So this loss is not unprecedented.
I appreciate what seems to be a sincere sentiment, but at the same time I don't feel like it's my place to point out to a stranger that her, say, sedentary lifestyle or drinking habit is a health risk.
The chorded keyboard idea is definitely interesting but voice recognition is what most people will use.

People don't always want to simply type fast. Imagine other use case cases, like designers, for example. They might be using a Wacom tablet and need to reach for the keyboard to "create a new layer", "change font to San Francisco", "50x100 rectangle", etc. Wouldn't voice recognition be much easier?

Here's an interesting study on chorded keyboards:

http://www.billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf
The substantial difference between those two things is often nil.
While I don't write and don't like C++, I don't understand why major foss projects choosing clang over gcc due to a philosophical spat is anything other than damning.

gcc should be fighting hard to continue to provide features competitive to clang while remaining true to it's values, but instead it has opted out of this for hypothetical purity (exporting the data in question is within the license terms and does not require changes in gcc itself, it can be implemented as a plugin, rms just doesn't like it and discourages loudly its implementation as it simply makes it easier for proprietary tools to use it. The situation is quite similar to dynamic linking).
I know. But if not even professional programmers use Coq day to day (because it's hard to use, the limitations and well known, etc.) why should we base our laws on it?

WE should start using it, when we enough gain experience we start using it in law writing.

As a matter of fact I'm going to check out Coq right now...
One problem you will run into here is that political use of the word "bias" isn't any sort of statistical claim; it's often just used to mean that something violates vague social expectations about what information is "acceptable" to use when making decisions. ML algorithms don't care; they will make the best possible decision based on the information they have, even if their though process (so to speak) is "biased" in the political sense that it may use gender, race, nationality, etc. to help make optimal decisions.
The ability to sell portions of your right to justice is both an important freedom and a check on the ability of those with power to trample on those without. It is interesting that so many people who claim to champion the rights of the powerless are vigorously opposed to the concept.
How is uber able to survive with losing so much of money? Is it because of all the contributions?
Same. Easy enough to drop into a bash shell when necessary, but the vast majority of my time is in fish.
Did anyone ever pay for this? I mean, did they have some algorithm that concluded I and everyone I've asked were more likely to uninstall than pay, so we were never asked?
"Drinking young people blood"?
C# is an interesting case, in relation to your comment. It has `struct`, which defines value-semantic types instead of reference-semantic types. However, `struct` types still inherit from `System.Object` and may still encapsulate and provide behavior. So you don't necessarily need a dynamic type system to blur these lines.
forgive typos, on phone.

While I understand your point there are some major differences in the purpose of murder laws and copyright laws and specifically in how they are carried out. You can't automate murder charges; you can't issue thousands of murder charges a day against someone. The onus is on the accuser to have evidence and they are required to present that in trial before anything legally actionable can happen. There has to be reasonable cause for suspicion to deprive a person of rights over a murder charge. And most importantly perhaps, murder laws can be used by people far more evenly.

My issue with copyright claims is that there's no cost to the companies for lying or being wrong. There's no reason to not send out dmca notices if you have no proof or are wrong. Murder is pretty clear cut in whether or not a murder has occurred, it's the "whodunnit" that is on trial. With copyright, whether a crime has actually been committed isn't as clear.

When a dmca is sent, it must include an oath, under penalty of perjury, that the information is accurate. If you lie in court, you get punished for perjury. Not so with dcma. An individual cannot win against a corporation as a rights holder -- this has been tested and often nothing happened except the corp eventually stopped the I fringemet after they already profited.

Fun aside, iOS Keeps trying to autocorrect dmca to scam.
This is an interesting angle. Are there examples of it actually happening?
I've been making similar points too, it's actually shocking how founders and VCs are convinced that their way is the absolute correct way

Instead of pointing out how stock options are primarily a reaction to accounting and taxation changes over the years , or the conflicts of interest in giving a more objective answer

There are plenty of financial products possible that will tread the line of compensating employees for their risk and the lack of money and liquidity startups have
Actually it does. If there is a 1% chance of a cyclists fatality for a certain illegal behavior, you might be that 1%. You will be 100% dead.
It uses pixel difference encoding down to alpha channels so that it can send you the bare minimum amount of data you need to keep a constant, non glitched image. This means 60fps using just under 1.5mbps
So this raises an interesting point. You could claim that everyone has a price, which may well be true. And if that is the case we should change the focus from just switching to the next new platform that promises [security/privacy] as a short term thing until someone offers them enough money. Instead we should focus on [building/using] something where no-matter the price offered the operators don't physically have the ability to hand over the data.

Stop using mobile phone numbers as account Id's might be a good start.
It's a data point and was used as such. The effects of breaking moving vehicle laws can be rationalized away when the mass of the vehicle moving is low. That doesn't preclude other incidences, such as this one, where someone who's job it is to drive a truck has to wrangle with the fact they killed someone. They guy who died could give two shits about the situation.

I saw a cyclist roll through a pedestrian crossing with people in it on his side of the road at the intersection at the end of my street. I rolled up to him in my car at the next light and told him he was breaking the law. He asked "but is it safe?". The implication is, with this leading question, is that he thought it was safe to do. What he didn't observe was the car behind him not slowing down for the pedestrians because they were watching him.

Stopping at a crosswalk, or yielding right of way, is an important rule because it gives VISUAL indicators to other drivers of nearby vehicles. It's a backup mechanism for safety at times. Rationalizing laws don't apply to oneself because they cause delay do not include the fact it the action may also be the difference between life and death - for someone else. Are we really going to rationalize away the fact driver may float lights more if they see bikes doing it as well?

The way Davis, CA handles this is to install special lights for bikes. I would assume they thought through it and decided floating lights is bad.

For the last 4 years, up until a few months ago, I had been riding at least 5-6 hours a day on fairly busy roads. I've seen a lot of shit that people do as a result of other's actions, including bikes, and I do NOT think bikes should be precluded from obeying traffic laws, especially when the only point to it might be to speed up a bike commute or "save energy". Whatever that means.
It's basically a personal rant disguised as an article about a new startup. I guess Cory has an axe to grind.
While that's a good point, the namedtuple is value-like enough to address the "anemic objects" problem.

Could you expand on the advantages of this:

(a, b, c) is (a, b, c)

being True instead of False?
Rollback is deprecated, it doesn't show up in the docs. Because people use it in scripts it will never be removed due to mercurial's backward compatibility guarantees.

Mercurial 3.9 ships with the journal extension, which is a bit like the git reflog: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/JournalExtension
By "shot the lights" I assume you mean going through the intersection even though you're facing a red light. (?) I don't do this, except as allowed by Wisconsin's pretty new law (must wait at least a minute after which you're allowed to assume the lights are "sensing" lights and don't sense your presence). Unless I'm missing some subtlety, I don't understand how it doesn't save time to go through...

I am not an aggressive biker or driver and that you bring them up is confusing the thesis of the article. NOBODY is proposing making it legal to just blast through a red light. Perhaps this is what you mean by shooting the lights, but in that case you "strongly disagreeing" with the article implies you might want to reread what was proposed. The embedded video is an awesome explainer.
Could be because the European Commission is known for giving multi-billion-dollar fines to foreign corporations for anticompetitive behaviour?

Uber might feel that the risk-reward ratio is not good enough here to be acting in bad faith.
Puppet 2016 State of DevOps Salary Report: Where the Jobs Are
I see from your comment history you know finance, so - um, what? There are different definitions of "profit".
I know it's a joke, but it got me wondering: What kind of treatment do you need nowadays to actually safely destroy flash storage? I doubt a single smash from a sledgehammer/boot has a good chance of destroying SIM and internal storage and µSD card such that forensic analysis can't recover its data. Thermite?
A notation for a data structure is a serialization format.

> In Lisp, that Sexpr will be crawled for data, or maybe even executed.

A s-expression cannot be executed; it's just text.

The object which it denotes can be walked or executed via eval.

Before that happens, the s-expression must be converted to that object.

In other words, deserialized by the reader.
Carveouts are one approach. Some quick googling found this very readable explanation with pros/cons from a reputable source: https://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2014/04...

This article primarily describes carveouts for management retention in a public company, but they can be used in private companies and are not restricted to management.

This is the only mechanism I have any familiarity with, I'm also very interested in hearing about others.
Why do you say "exercise" with quotation?
This is probably spot on, and the bit I missed when reading. So they share your phone number and contacts (or Facebook and Whatsapp use the same hash off your phone number and share that), but Facebook promises not to put the number you have in Whatsapp on the website.
What's the value of WhatsApp? It is the scale of the product. I use it because most of my friends are on it. There are many other alternatives to WhatsApp as pointed out by many in this thread, but none of them have nearly the same traction.

The only business model that allows such scale is the ad supported model. If WhatsApp was subscription based, I am sure they could not have achieved this scale. And I wouldn't have found value in it.

I realize that the ad supported model is what indirectly adds so much value to WhatsApp. Therefore, it makes sense to me to support that model if the model is reasonable enough. They have end to end encryption, which means my content is safe from prying eyes. That's already huge. So I really don't mind if they share my number with Facebook.
The author isn't saying the problem is JSON.

The same programming style exists quite a bit in older PHP code as well. This is because one of it's primary data types is an list/hashtable hybrid. And JSON is similar -- it promotes those same structural types; the list and the hashtable (array and object, respectively). So programmers are using them, not just for building structures for data interchange, but for actual programming logic.

The fix for the problem is just education.
I recall that Thiel wants to get blood transfusions from people younger than him to prolong his own life.

Many of the apparently absurd claims about Thiel are, well, absolutely true. Indeed, this particular one was linked directly to a news article about it.
5 steps to building web wireframes with parallax scrolling
Doctorow helpfully provided a hyperlink citation!
Drinking? No. Wants? Yes. That "Young people's blood" text in the article is a link that explains the reference quite clearly.
Can see how this would be great for creative coding :)
I'll add that it would feel as though I am acting in bad faith not notifying them about my uneasiness up front.
I generally avoid busy roads, but when I am at a light I do enter the center of the lane. This is because one of the most common accidents that cyclists suffer is the "right hook" where a right-turning car does not see you. I accelerate hard in that case and don't ever get the feeling I'm hassling anyone much.
At this point everyone should be using an evolvable (thrift, protocol buffers, avro, etc) schema format when they are storing or transmitting their data if they want to run an always on service - there is no downtime for migrations in the real world. Trying to do this ad-hoc with JSON is a lost cause and will eventually lead you to failure at runtime or worse, data loss situations.
The article disagrees with you.

>> Public health researcher Jason Meggs found that after Idaho started allowing bikers to do this in 1982, injuries resulting from bicycle accidents dropped. When he compared recent census data from Boise to Bakersfield and Sacramento, California — relatively similar-sized cities with comparable percentages of bikers, topographies, precipitation patterns, and street layouts — he found that Sacramento had 30.5 percent more accidents per bike commuter and Bakersfield had 150 percent more.
Define price. There are many worlds that we all live in without money. In many worlds and cultures, that 'price' is your honor or the price of your soul. And the value of those types of things is often worth more than any amount of money. Cincinnatus is a good example of this, though there are many many others. When you read about the lives of monetarily wealthy people, they will often tell you that the money does not matter after a certain point. That family and friends matter. I agree with you that we all have a price, but for a lot of folk, that price is not measured in dollars, but in lives, in the soul, or in honor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus
That's truly remarkable. Facebook doesn't make that much money per users (about $1/user/month, as best as I can figure). I know people who would pay twice that for a privacy-keeping subscription tier.
"Also, we can't get tickets that raise our car insurance premium"

Therein is the real reason for many cyclists doing it - not because it makes sense (a lot of the time it doesn't) but because there are no consequences. There's no licensing, registration or insurance to cycle on the roads. Many cyclists, and I cycle too, behave accordingly with no consideration for other road users, or pedestrians. Hence many cyclists now cycling on footpaths (illegally) and some getting irritated when they encounter a pedestrian on it!

Most "annoyed drivers" aren't annoyed by a cyclist carefully crossing an empty junction - the annoyance comes in rush hour when others are inconvenienced or it's plain reckless.
Rest of the world: "Please take me to such and such address"

Japan: "Please start driving towards <famous landmark>. You know that convenience store near there? Yeah that's the one, can you take me there for starters. OK, now still continue a bit forward. Now turn right in the next intersection. Yes, right here, next take a left..."
What do you want to do? Pull transaction data or something else?
Stop signs, at least 4 way stops, it's fairly easy to see whether or not there's anyone at the intersection that you'll need to stop for, so it's pretty pointless to stop if nobody is there. For stop lights, I usually stop to see if anyone's coming, then go through if it's clear. It's pointless to wait there for nothing.

Drivers are going to be pissed off no matter what. Being pissed off is a natural result of making the poor decision to drive a car in a city.
This. I've been programming this way for over a decade. Long before JSON was a thing. I find I rarely need anythng more than a list or a dict for most of the data manipulation I do. Being on the web has only strengthened my tendency for this, since everything ends up being stringly typed anyways. Nearly every function/API I write is: get some data from somewhere (hopefully serialized), manipulate the data, return data (very possibly serialized). Nearly every time I've seen coworkers try to improve things with classes, it complicates the code, and often adds little encapsulation given how much we do is reliant on external data sources.

Every once in a while I think how nice it would be to be able to use typed data and smart setters to avoid much of the bounds checking I have to do, but I find there's never enough code between the boundaries of serialization to make it worth the added complexity that this introduces (also my problem domain involves mostly copy so most things are basically strings, ints, or datetimes anyways).
I meant, "since when does ridiculousfish post anything?"
Something that's not VC funded or otherwise depending on external money sources, or you'll have the same problem again a few years down the road when $Alternative is asked to turn a profit.
The world’s first network of fully self-driving taxis is up and running
There are 3 cases where rolling through or jump starting at a red light makes sense, and is sometimes safer in my opinion. The first is a t-intersection where the bike lane runs through the non-traffic side - its absolutely safe to run these if you've verified nobody is in the crosswalk. The second is fast moving roads with no or shared bike lanes. In this case I find safely rolling through allows me to get ahead of traffic and up to speed before cars start flying by. I feel this is safer than impeding traffic as you clip in and more slowly get up to speed. Finally, red lights with pressure sensors and no upcoming cars to trigger them. Unless you want to sit there all day I think it's ok to roll through these.
This makes me think of John Scalzi's The Ghost Brigades. I wonder how far it is between mapping thoughts to being able to map someone's memories and consciousness. If such a thing is even possible at all.
Honestly: they don't need to feed data into their <del>spam cannon</del> adtech to solve spam?

Next up: These guys are selling booze to support AA!
Funding lawsuits for profit is a well-known society anti-pattern called "champerty." It is no longer illegal (as blocking it interfered with access to justice) but when used for profit or other agendas it is pretty damaging (think patent trolls).
The article was talking about the differences in power between different type systems. It's not even primarily focused on dependent types, let alone advocating for using them or claiming that they're easy. In fact it notes that the more advanced type systems "make the language more complex." If the article were suggesting everyone should use dependent types, or that they were easy, then your admonishments about dependent type systems would make sense here, but as it is I'm not sure.
From the article:

>If a cyclist approaches a red light, meanwhile, he or she needs to stop fully. Again, if there's any oncoming traffic or a pedestrian, it has the right of way. If there's not, the cyclist can proceed cautiously through the intersection. Put simply, red light is a stop sign.

>This doesn't mean that a cyclist is allowed to blast through an intersection at full speed — which is dangerous for pedestrians, the cyclist, and pretty much everyone involved. This isn't allowed in Idaho, and it's a terrible idea everywhere.

Nobody is suggesting that cyclists should just ignore right of way.
All these new features is basically them trying to become the new WeChat, where we'll have one central place to manage all our digital needs (buying tickets, paying bills, getting notifications from the bank, etc.) [0]

[0] http://www.economist.com/news/business/21703428-chinas-wecha...
I totally understand why Peter Thiel felt the way he did about Gawker. Outing someone is a HORRIBLE thing to do. I can't underscore that enough. Especially in the way that they did. They engaged in yellow journalism and hid behind the shield of reporting.

That being said, this idea that we can extinguish the flame of reporting with a firehose of money is a horrible precedent. This is essentially saying that the rich few can determine what is reported to the masses due to their wealth. Allowing things like this endangers the important investigative reporting that uncovers things like bad working conditions, corruption and other horrible things that go on in society.
> I'm deliberately provoking it.

I'll just start flagging you for trolling then. It's one thing to attempt to have a meaningful discussion and unintentionally provoke ire. Meaningfully doing it by being obtuse and smug... I guess qwerty was spot on with the Randall Monroe quote.
Yes it is.

Serialization doesn't have to handle a particular type system in its entirety to be serialization.

A serialization scheme can dictate its own type system; which can be smaller than that of the programming languages which support that serialization scheme.

JSON has a simple type system; it serializes that system.

(Might you be confusing serialization for other concepts like object store databases, or image saving?)