skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, this has been my experience of American media coverage of political stories: so many news organizations have ideological or political goals that I have come to expect biased reporting. This problem is especially problematic (in my opinion) in America where large sums are spent and entire (political, financial, and personal) fortunes hinged on the ability to successfully convey a (biased) message (Of course, special mention goes out to Russia, China & Co., but I would argue that the problem there is largely one of state propaganda). Here in Kenya, these problems are of a different nature: there are no popular ideological camps or political narratives. Our politics are personality and ethnic-driven. Only recently have American evangelical organizations begun to polarize public sentiment and journalism around issues such gay rights and abortion. In addition, the moneyed interests of the private sector have deployed relatively large war chests with the purpose of controlling media organizations and their messaging, especially to convince the electorate that next year's general elections are apocalyptic. On a side note, in many respects, the rhetoric of this year's American election (while having, for example, real consequences for relations between minority communities and government services such as policing) pales in comparison to the impact of negative rhetoric in countries such as mine (often, all it takes to ignite physical confrontations is inflammatory content; sadly, people here go all in on these sort of things) which is why I have a burning desire to find something that I can relate to.

Libertarianism's pro-immigration was my first point of contact and was immediately endearing. I identify with minorities that suffer as a result of racist nativism. However, I am still a little confused as to why exactly libertarians are still unable to shake off the accusation of racism [0]. These accusations can make this ideology seem rather unpalatable: I really need to understand. Pointers?

[0]
This from Salon.com (I know, not exactly neutral arbiters, but still...) "Libertarianism is for white men: The ugly truth about the right’s favorite movement" (http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/why_libertarianism_is_so_pop...)

Election Update: Is Gary Johnson Taking More Support From Clinton Or Trump? (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-is-gary-...)

What is the libertarian view on racism? (https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-libertarian-view-on-racism)

Question: Why do most libertarians seem racist? (https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughLibertarianSpam/comments/3hi5...)
>Both sides are doing bad things.

Such statements downplay the root cause and pretend like all parties are equally guilty which is never the case. All sides did bad things in WW2, although it doesn't make all parties equally guilty. It was Hitler who started it. It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. He personally and Russia in general bear the responsibility for the war they planned, prepared, started, financed and still keep running.
Based on my own interactions with the Bürgeramt I think it would be most fun to have a Religious Name of "null null" -- at which point it's win-win, since you can confuse the bureaucrats and/or demand that your full Religious Name be recognized since, well, religion.

(Or, to up the ante, one might consider "Keine Angabe" as a Religious Name. It would stand out amongst the nulls, while also being the actual null they are trying to point to.)
They did. Then the EU retroactively decided it wasn't enough. Even Ireland (the county the money is supposedly owed to) says it's ridiculous.
I think it is ridiculous that we have a minimum age for presidency but no max. age.
> why is it not being done? There's a lot of companies making IoT stuff, but it's really hard to find any of them making robust systems. The lack of profitability is the only way I can reconcile that.

Two reasons.

1. Time to market. Reliability and security are slightly expensive in money but very expensive in calendar time (throwing bodies at the problem, substituting money for time, is a somewhat effective way to get features and marketing, but not an effective way to get security).

2. Power. Remember that the entire edifice of modern economics is a leaky abstraction implemented on top of a killer ape. Power is a stronger motive than money.
Google is largely ads these days on anything commercial, followed by organic. With the introduction of a 4th top placement ad its amazing how little organic search is showing on a screen.

Type in a competitively commercial term like 'credit card' and think how it was 10 years back. Its amazing how they have trained us to accept this. Or maybe its just the lock of better options...
Also younger workers are lot cheaper and don't have families, so you can work them longer hours.

Older techies have wised up.
I don't know about ocaml, but in general async is also about parallelism as it exposes concurrency opportunities. See cilk spawn for example.
> Even Ireland (the county the money is supposedly owed to) says it's ridiculous.

Ireland is accused (and convicted) of giving illegal tax benefits to Apple. Of course they don't like the verdict.
Whatever side you're on, it's a damn shame what's happened in the Donbass. All the industry bombed to shit, thousands killed, more jobless and forced into poverty. And it doesn't look like it will be over anytime soon. I just hope the people there get enough aid to survive, and maybe a hand rebuilding out of the rubble once the fighting stops.

Слава україні, героям слава.
Never heard of https://schema.org/ before. Looks like a great resource thanks!
Hey I've tried to talk with your customer service/sales through that chat widget on your website- twice now, but get nothing.

I have a couple questions before I buy. Could you or someone knowlegeable about the product reach me, please?

Contact info in HN profile.

-Thanks
Vandals just decimated Burning Man's 'fancy camp'
Okay, this is a little late but when you say 10X = 9.999... then X = 0.999... not because you have removed the 9 but because that's what X is; a tenth of 10X! So when you say in your argument 10X = 9.9 and therefore 10X - X = 9.9 - 0.9, that's wrong. 10X = 9.9 implies X = 0.99. No wiggle room. No need to consider infinites, just one movement of a decimal point.

[And hence 10X - X = 9.9 - 0.99 = 8.91 = 9X implying that X = 0.99]

Following, as delineated above, from there, you'll see there's no contradiction. It's not so easy to break arithmetic that easily without dividing by zero :)

Sorry for dragging on this meaningless thread.
But also view-time or view-count don't tell the full story of how much you liked that video.

I am not happy with YT recommendations because they suggest crap videos to me and not the finest one available for that topic, just as he said.

The system should rather suggest me a different topic but with the best quality/content available, rather than a super similar video with crappier quality/content.
please read the comments i am responding to. the comment i am responding to is positing that in large companies, the main product is political game-playing (i do not necessarily believe that this is true), stating that delivering and shipping what people typically think of as "product" is #4 and #5 at best (again, i think that is a distorted generalization).

at the same time, the comment i am replying to posits that "critical thinkers" are the effective people in an organization who are really the ones who get things done. at the same time stating that these people who get things done are sidelined, punished and rendered ineffective by the organization. at the same time stating that these same people are the ones who are focused on low-priority items in that organization.

i agree with you, taken together, those statements are rather inane.. not only that but also wildly inconsistent, an ironic example of sloppy critical thinking.

i do not know where you get the impression that critical thinkers "should" play the game better. i am stating the obvious (which apparently isnt), that you would expect truly effective critical thinkers to be very good at focusing on the main priority within an organization, which based on the definitions defined by the previous commentor, is not "shipping product", but rather playing the game better. i disagree with that conclusion, but it is a consistent conclusion that follows assumptions that i also think are flawed.

in fact, assuming the negative assumptions about large organizations are valid, truly effective critical thinkers in such an organization would be able to see thru typical "mission statements" about delivering great product and service yada yada ... and instead focus on the accumulation of individual power and influence, if that is the main purpose of any human group. "the true organization man is the one who is most skeptical [aka critically thinking] about the organization"... or something like that.

anyway, critical thinking and emotionalism (bitterness and resentment about the unfairness of it all) would seem to be mutually opposed.
This generalized labelling is about the only way the US government can sway opinion because they flood television with these phrases. And because most of the US believe anything they see on TV without question, the government gets some semblance of control. The same thing happened with bitcoin, tor, Marijuana, etc. Basically anything that hasn't or can't be heavily monetized and taxed without upsetting some other company.

I bet if some large corporation came out with it, the government would have no problems. Because they could probably convince that company to let them monitor everything
The brutal ageism of tech
Xerox Alto Restoration Part 5 [video]
The only time I can think of that happening is poorly written SQL queries built out of concatenating strings. And if a system is doing that it has far bigger problems than the last name "Null"
I'm a grey beard who applied to a company specifically advertising for young developers. Got the job without mentioning my vintage. That was six years ago and they still haven't seen my face. I waited a while to gently break the news to them. If you're a technological senior citizen remote work is your friend.
Recently I got an email about a job that seemed interesting. It's a well known company that used to be a startup but is now a mature company. I went to the job description page: 8+ years experience, tech stack I'm familiar with, mostly backend work, seems ok so far.

Then I get to the last line. Open office, has video games, happy hours, other typical things designed to attract those in their 20s. It's all a hidden message screaming, if you're old, don't apply. And they want someone with 8+ years experience! It's ridiculous.
> Well sure, but like in all security it's about adjusting the attacker's effort/reward ratio.

That's exactly right (and a large part of my point). But if you have a fairly large unsecured window easily visible and a very secure door, there's a good chance that might just get smashed in and people will run in and grab a few high value items before running away. This probably isn't as crazy as it sounds to some, as I heard from a police officer not too long ago that in some cases cars just drive up to a property, someone jumps out and knocks to see if someone is home, and then they just kick the front door in, and run in and grab a few items. A more secure door will prevent that exact scenario, but if they can tell the door is secure, what's to prevent them from throwing something through the window? They are already expecting a loud noise and possibly being noticed, glass breaking doesn't seem like it would deter them (other houses may look easier, but if you look more appealing for some other reason, that may be all that matters in this case).

What I really wanted to point out is that what's really protecting you in most cases is the perception that it's hard to break in, and while reinforcing your door may meet that criteria in your eyes, those that break into houses may have long ago dropped the idea that the door is the only, main, or even best way to break into a house.
Reminds me of a tweet I saw a while back where someone was told their four digit pin couldn't be a year. To which they replied "aren't they all years?"
What was it like working with Andrew Gower? He strikes me as a technical genius with some of the stuff Jagex was doing with Java circa early 2000's [1].

[1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrVUegwSKlY
Tor really sucks for sending abusive traffic, it's slow and blacklisted by everyone (IME mostly due to problematic users, rather than "hacking" and such).

Luminati for example offers a much better service, as do the hundreds of thousands of routers offering unauthenticated SSH tunneling around the world. Way better speeds, and no blacklists.

> Tor's anonymity is analogous to Twitter's free speech, but in both cases, abuse of those freedoms defines the need for some practical protections in order to maintain them.

This sounds worryingly like a call to weaken Tor, I really hope it's not.
Not even PHP (it took me about 10 minutes to remember how to PHP before I could test it to be sure).
It's safe to run relays at home but not exits.
o/ 29 year old here, 20 years coding, 13 years of people paying me to code. We exist.

I sure hope companies don't have that as a base expectation, though.
I've been doing these security steps every single time since rentals got bluetooth. Every rental unless it's brand new has dozens of people's contacts and other data in it.
Re: last part

Idris programming language has "Uniqueness types" [1], that are inspired by Clean and Rust.

There is also an interesting talk [2] where Idris author discusses state/side-effects management.

[1] http://docs.idris-lang.org/en/latest/reference/uniqueness-ty...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpPyolN65s0
Sure. But fish may not be the only animals so treated. And, in any case, you did say that testosterone's effect on humans is not harmful. We have here a case in which it is. There are many others, for this and other hormones. To blithely discount the possibility that eating hormone-treated meat may pose a risk seems therefore rather optimistic.
Better surfacing of quality submissions, fairer treatment of new or viable submissions (better spread of exposure and better overall volume of opportunities to upvote), more relevant content for each user (mixed in with global top stories), less influence by a handful of people, less feasible to game with voting rings or forced/"bought" upvotes, etc.
how do you work for someone without them knowing your age? Do you keep that out of your CV? How about credentials and signing your contact? Seems very strange to me.
lwhalen, social contract, like the word liberal, has two meanings.

Originally it was an idea of Edmund Burke, the Irishman who explained much of Conservative thinking in the book Reflections on the French Revolution. It meant the 'deal' between the generations.

An example of a positive intergenerational deal is the old quote I'll paraphrase/butcher here about 'A civilization is one in which people plant acorns which will one day provide shade for their grandchildren'.

Of course the Social Contract can be broken too. I would say the Bolsheviks and the French Revolutionaries (despite their long propaganda campaigns) broke the contract, leaving their grandchildren in a worse position than in a counterfactual history where their thought pattern did not fruit into horrific memeplexes devoid of natural adaption, totally contingent on holding up order with brute force.

The second meaning of the social contract is the Liberal version which is broadly the social democracy 'deal', originally from Roseau (I think), which also centers around mutual benefit, but I think more across space rather than time as with Burke.

If it is a positive deal, then money departs the pockets of those who don't strictly speaking require it to survive and the unfortunates of the world get propelled into better patterns of behaviour that ultimately generate a society than is holistically the better off because of it. So we get progressive taxation.

Just as with the first deal, there is the inversion of it also. So it could morph into a giant fraud where the already rich or well positioned in society exhort fiscal transfers from people who ought in fact to be receiving the very payments they are paying in tax.

So whether the phrase is a dog whistle depends on the intentions of the author, or (this is often my suspicion) whether they thought they understood the words 'social' and 'contract' and so why not the conjunction. The West is filled with literate people who don't read but who aquaplane their way through life until they hit the hard shoulder.
word2vec did inspire earlier iterations of the model, but the key insight is that embeddings are learned jointly with all other model parameters. There is no separate source of embeddings. This way, embeddings are specialized for the the specific task.
SpaceX asked to pay $50M after losing a satellite
`txt.avi` could be more descriptive.
I've recently played with using nil pointer references as a form of default overloading. The process in the function block was something like:

1) assign default value to variable

2) check if pointer parameter is nil

3) if pointer is not nil assign pointer value to variable

4) do work with variable

Am I overlooking a simpler way to do this? I feel like lib.LibraryFuncion(nil, nil) is nicer then lib.LibraryFunction(lib.LibraryDefaultOne, lib.LibraryDefaultTwo), though admittedly the explicitness of the second option is appealing.
There will always be a minimum age for everything. Simply because age is a positive number.
of course; but that's not tor's threat model anyhow. Nevermind the scenario of being mostly taken over; it also obviously falls to traffic analysis by a global passive observer.

In other words, its not gonna protect you from the NSA, ever, nor was it meant to. It might have a fightning chance against the FBI though. Actually it was surprising how in Snowden's files, the NSA was having trouble reliably deanonymizing targeted tor users.
Lookit, this thread started because you said "nor is it that hard to even write your own secure mail server, alone", which I disagreed with, saying that it is in fact "very hard". You seem to have a definition of the word "hard" that is just much closer to "infeasible" than my own, which is nearby "takes a good deal of expertise and / or effort". It really isn't very interesting which of us is more "right" about what is and isn't "hard".

I honestly hope you're right that someday I'll work on a project and find myself thinking "wow, it wasn't even that hard to get the security story right on this", and I guess that day has already come for you, but it certainly hasn't for me.
Another factor is that as time goes on, some people exit coding and go into management. The older the cohort you're looking at, the more pronounced the effect becomes since more people have had the chance to churn.
The phrase "you seem confused" appears to be almost derogatory in nature, or do you believe the parent poster was in a state of confusion ? I fail to understand how it could be relevant to the argument in either case, or was it intended to silence someone elses voice?

The legal concept of free speech is not a hammer to solve every problem, and neither is it an instruction manual for how to act in any situation. Free speach is a framework within which communication is implicitly encouraged and explicitly guaranteed, except in certain cases when it causes damage to others, defamation per se being one example.

Your right to say something does not always make it the right thing to say, this is not in any way nullified by the existence of legal protection for the speach in question.
I wouldn't be surprised if non-Americans called it that.
Exactly -- "if they are". Are they? How can you, as a manager, know? How can you make 100% sure that every developer to ever work on the code always does the right thing?

Then consider the downside and cost of filtering the input, vs. the downside and cost of injection attack times a probability of 0.01% of a developer messing up -- and a policy, however idiotic it may seem to the individual developer, may make sense on a business level.
I am sorry, but what is wrong with having video games in the office?
At both my previous companies I played games time to time, with co-workers. 15 mins of playing Fifa with a co-worker end s up both relaxing, and productive as you both bond and hash out things, and often much better than boring meeting.

I am 35 btw. Also, our CEO regularly played as well.

I have been at an office/environment (Amazon), with cubicles, or offices, people coming in, going home at 5:30pm, no social time, nothing interesting. I thought that was awful, and I would never work in a place that doesn't understand that creativity requires some play time as well.
And most employers don't care about those stated value adds. It is what it is.
Exactly, why would I sync my anything to something that isn't mine? That's like checking your bank account from a kiosk.. All the NOPEs.
Do Intel and Amd release Chinese documentation?
People working in tech also tend to retire early or start doing their own thing due to their salary.
This is a very natural avenue and an active area of research at Google/Deep Mind. Stay tuned...
That's certainly my use case. Things like easy multi-line strings make it very useful, and readable by less tech-inclined folks. Though for that audience ArchieML is better still:

http://archieml.org
>That there even exists some simple set of rules we can all follow, something that fits in 80 columns to match our source code style guide, that will resolve all these problems. No, these problems are complicated.

Resolving all the problems is not the goal. The norm of not excluding people for their political views is a truce, not an optimized solution.

Yes, it doesn't perfectly resolve all problems, but the problems it leaves unresolved are less damaging than fights over the correct people to exclude.
That you exist isn't the problem. The problem is discrimination based on age.
I don't (I'm from europe) and I don't know anybody that does.
That's what I always expect `git rebase -i` will do, but it doesn't.
I believe the link proves my point: "he" is the formal/traditional use, but people are changing that for PC reasons.

> Do you say "thou" all the time?

"You" was not only the plural second-person but also the formal singular second-person (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction#Englis...) -- similar to German "sie" and "Sie". So it was always correct.

Anyway, I'm sure the PC crowd will win. It's just an (in this case, innocuous) example how systemically they can change they way we speak and communicate.
yup. Though apparently they could deanonymize some folks, but couldn't target the users they wanted.

But I'd expect that to change, a low-latency network like tor that also doesn't create cover traffic just architecturally isn't equipped to deal with something approaching a global passive adversary. Though networks for even that can be built..
In the same way as you shouldn't blindly consume RT, you shouldn't blindly consume stuff from Washington, London, Paris or anywhere else. There is precious little journalism that is not a front for someone's agenda, so it's important to know that agenda and "weight" content accordingly.
This is standard. I don't really like it either but all conferences I've attended do this and they aren't scams. I'm not sure if there is a deliberate reason or if it's just the natural order of conference logistics.

You always have the option of not buying a ticket until seeing the speakers list, but you risk losing your early bird pricing or the conference selling out. I suppose that if attendees have so much confidence that they are willing to commit before seeing the speaker list and the conference sells out, one can't really argue against this model.