skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This proof is more subtle than it appears. Here's a bogus rewrite, for instance:

Let 10X = 9.9. Then 10X - X = 9.9 - 0.9 = 9 = 9X. Hence X = 1, but X is actually 0.99 in this case (not 0.9). You need 0.99 = 0.9 for this to work with the exact same structure as your version.

Your proof only works because appending a 9 to an infinite expansion of 9s does not actually add a 9. But at this point you're forced to establish meaning for an infinite expansion of 9s, at which point this is really not just algebra anymore.
In my country (the United States) the military is under civilian control.
Currency pegging was used in Venezuela too and that story ended in disaster.

Which period are you referring to?

Venezuela's biggest problem right now, besides the drought which has hit their electrical supply, is that the government looted the oil industry instead of maintaining it and taking a sustainable vig from it. I haven't looked at the numbers (but see e.g. this production chart: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/venezuela/crude-oil-producti...), but as I understand it the lower oil prices are secondary to this, although if they'd maintained, let alone expanded production, I suppose the prices would be even lower....
It's more complex than that. It's difficult to find a pattern, that's what everyone is casting about for. Two people died last month after slipping on the exit, for example.
>externalizing the costs of ongoing industrialization to societies that can least afford the costs.

We regulate pollution, China mostly doesn't. It's not clear to me what policy you think the West should adopt to fix this.
> graph theory

Then once you learn graph theory and about trees and graphs, you can learn about data structures like self-balance binary trees, dawgs, flow networks etc., then algorithms that run on those data structures like Dijkstra's algorithm or the Ford-Fulkerson algorithm.
I know. I meant: maybe that is acceptable in Middle East, but it is not acceptable in Switzerland.
In this context, it's a US federal government designation for protected land. http://wilderness.org/article/wilderness-designation-faqs

The word does also mean in some contexts any land that is undeveloped, so the meaning can be overloaded.
Both China and India have huge problems with citizens ignoring medical emergency to avoid being held responsible if the patient doesn't recover. The case of Wang Yue is famous enough that even most Americans have heard of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Wang_Yue
Ted Cruz and his weird relationship with .com
I would argue that it's valuable in itself to actually know what the humanity has found about the universe and how it works and how this method called science is supposed to work.

The only purpose of the continued existence of the mankind is only what we ourselves decide upon and make our purpose. What is the best of ourselves? Towards what end should we aspire to? The greater understanding of nature and ourselves and history and truth and beauty, or being marginally more effective in producing more shiny skinner boxes to enthral our neighbours? The man standing on the Moon, or a new fancy gadget that wibbles and wobbles a bit better than the previous version on wibble-wobbler?

Especially so in the western societies, where the ideal is that citizens vote and participate in the public life and make collectively decisions. Plato claimed that society should be ruled by philosopher-kings. There are many reasons why his utopia would not work out in real life without being utterly horrible, but one thing that we ourselves, who have the right to vote, try our best to be a worthy of the tiny bit of the crown of a philosopher-king that democracy grants us as our right.

Of course, not too many people seem to be interested in being curious about universe. Sometimes it makes me despair.
Wow, what a video.

"You know, fear is a super-important thing now. And without fear, you will die."

"I'm actually pretty happy this happened. I think in the long run it saved my life."

Mind you, he doesn't leave much margin for error in his come-back jump!
It's not like start-up founders and other types of entrepreneurs aren't also risk takers - different people get their adrenaline rush in different ways. The difference is that if (when?) you fail, you've lost your money (or someone else's if you're funded).
By some definition, accessing gmail over TLS counts as "in-flight encryption" too.

Encrypting when the organization has the keys is only effective when accessing the ciphertext is easier than accessing the key material.

I'd prefer a solution where Google could only store encrypted blobs with no access to my keys and all decryption happens on the client device.
Love the ribbon too. OO/LO/iWork have become unusable for me since the ribbon.

The initial implementation of the ribbon sucked. It was too static, it didn't hide and took up a whole lot of space, and it didn't give you any pointers on KB shortcuts.

It also took MS some time of gathering data and telemetry to improve the layout. And frankly, it took users some time to adjust to the change.

The ribbon is much better now. But the people who like it, possibly still suffering from having to maybe defend it when it legitimately had flaws, are not as loud about it online.
I thought HN prevented submiting the same link twice. Doesn't it?
My dad would still use 98 today if he had the choice. He's increasingly hated every version of Windows since 98.
The sum, 0.9 * Σ (0.1)^n from n=0 to n=N-1, is 0.999... as N goes to ∞ (write out the terms).

On the other hand, for any finite value of N, the sum [1] is equal to 0.9 * (1-(0.1)^N) / (1-0.1) = 1 - (0.1)^N. This value goes to 1 as N goes to ∞.

More rigorously, for any positive value, ε, there is a value N, such that the value of the finite sum is within ε of 1.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_series#Formula
Or like the diheadral angle of airplane wings, anhedral ("negative dihedral") isn't as common.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihedral_(aeronautics)
> How do you update all the software to the newest version?

Same way you do on Linux: MANUALLY. Unless you're running a rolling distribution like arch, most of the software you run is out of date. Sometimes you can find a PPA with the most recent stuff, but if you can't, you're compiling manually.

On linux, that comprises all software I run on the machine, command line and graphical. On OS X, it only affects stuff run through homebrew, which is a small fraction of apps that have no native OS X implementation. Not exactly a compelling argument to switch.
I guess the relevant question is whether this would have been easier if the ribbon didn't exist, and you had to do it through the menu bar.

It appears to me that the issue here is that Excel makes scaling the axis of a chart convoluted. Not that the ribbon makes it harder than the regular menu bar.
I was editing the post while you replied. I realised that my post wasn't conveying any useful point.

In general, when many people hear Quant they think about quantitative portfolio manager - this is what I was talking about and where the "money" is at. It seems that IBs tend to use "quant" nowadays for a role that is very similar to Silicon Valley "data scientist".
I've always thought trigonometry was one of the more useful things I did learn in school. Comes in handy a lot with carpentry and building projects. It's kind of cool when you realize that most of the shortcuts and rules-of-thumb that the old timers and carpenters use all the time can be derived from trigonometry, even if they never formally learned it that way.
or it might not be.
Windows 8 has almost no corporate adoption, so the interesting data point is 2020 and 7, which is just a bit more than three years away. Migration targets should be somewhere around 2019 (last minute really), but procurement for new machines with Windows 10 builds might start being rolled out in the first half of 2019 with most corps, which is practically just 2 years away. Factor in that the next generation chips still need some time to get to marked and you have a rather narrow gap, especially with corps that have a more conservative hardware policy. I don't see the issue here. I just hope that the Windows 10 rolling update will reduce the enterprise upgrade anxiety.
Eh, I wouldn't put economists in the same category as generals or engineers. They are more like clergy or court astrologers. Their job is to make the numbers work for the politicians, who in turn work for the bankers.
What more do you want then? Nearly every country in the world has adopted the US's system of central banking: an unelected, privately owned central bank that creates money through bond purchases or some other mechanism.

In the US this entity is so revered that their policies are rarely even a point of discussion in our extremely partisan politics. Hell, just suggesting that they permit an audit is considered controversial.

As far as I can tell, politicians exert basically zero influence over actual monetary policy. As long as they have a constant supply of new fiat to fund entitlements and other niceties for their constituents they don't rock the boat.
I completely agree with you, and understand all that.

> L is the smallest number in E such that L is greater than or equal to all numbers in S.

And note that this doesn't imply that L is in S!

So here we have S = { 0, 0.x, 0.xx, 0.xxx, ... }. E is R, the set of reals. The smallest number in R greater than or equal to anything in S is 1. That doesn't mean 1 is in S. If 1 is not in S, then we're taking a notation based on condensing the names of the elements in S, like "0.x...", or 0.x with a bar over the x, and making that notation denote something not in S, namely 1.

This doesn't appear incompatible with the limit-based construction.

Are there instances in which this supremum approach toward continued decimals disagrees with the limit approach, in establishing the value?
Thank you very much! I think 100% health/dental is included, will check. Will negotiate payment of Medical Services Plan.

How about renting 3-bed Apt/House in suburbs 40-50 minutes to commute? As far as I understand it is Richmond or Burnaby.
Maybe the best argument for teaching people math is to show them how complexity can be tamed via patterns. As in, if you sit down and think logically, you can find solutions or come up with approaches to even the gnarliest-looking problems. And things that sound very simple (e.g. the Fermat conjecture, which can be understood by 5-th graders) can have really complicated solutions. It should teach people how to use their slow thinking rather than their fast thinking and that they absolutely have the capacity to do it. I've similarly never met anyone who had to do 20 accurately timed hops in a row daily, but I don't hear anyone want to remove jumprope and P.E. Still, there should absolutely be a class on "real-world applied mathematics" where you're taught the mathematical principles behind loans, mortgages, taxes, etc.
The value of studying more advanced mathematics is not tied strictly to what will be used on a day-to-day basis in one's job. I studied math well beyond what I use in my day-to-day work as a software engineer, but I've found it valuable for at least two different reasons. First, it exposed me to ideas and concepts beyond what is right in front of me every day. If I happen upon the occasional question about computational theory or cryptography or whatever, I am at least aware that there's a field of study around it and I know where to look for solutions to known problems. Second, I don't think I'm entirely unique in that my mastery of lesser math was improved by studying higher math. In other words, I'm pretty rusty on things such as partial differential equations, but because I studied them, I know algebra, trig, basic calculus, etc., cold and that is beneficial both in my day-to-day work and normal life.
I used this for a day and while it's cute, it's hard to write anything exact with it. Maybe if there was an option to go to 1,500 or 2,000 common words.

I was amused by the Trump team using it. Maybe the other candidates were and we just missed it.

I use a readability tool to check how some things read and make an attempt to reduce the complexity. Most times breaking a long sentence will do it.

Complexity of this text is 85 on readability, grade 5.
Also the population density of Finland isn't exactly staggering and it's not like this service is available everywhere across Finland.

Having a small population and only a few highly populated metropolitan areas make it easy.

Providing 1gbps cellular connection in NYC isn't really possible, Helsinki on the other hand is doable.
As for the rural areas they aren't covered in Finland and even if a few are the size of the country also plays a role because good luck getting 1gig cell towers across Nebraska.
But the "example from real analysis" section in your link uses exactly the same limiting technique to construct e. That section shows that 0.999... is constructible.
Ask HN: How much maintenance time do your side projects require?
What is a realistic amount of time it takes, say per month, to maintain a medium-sized (hard to define, but I think you get my drift) web app?
I found this article disappointing because there's no advancement of a thesis or journalistic investigation. The author could have tracked down any number of illuminating statistics: number of wing suits sold over time; BASE/wing suit deaths over time; number of live videos posted over time. As the piece lacks either of these, it's almost pointless and thus the author attempts to tie it together with a question, just as you often see in college essays. There's no honest attempt to answer the question. So it's neither an essay nor investigative journalism. It's Reader's Digest. The article cashes in on prurient interest in death without paying anything back.

(To be clear this is an interesting topic to me. I followed Dean Potter for years, back from when he first made his name for slacklining and climbing.)
You are truly seeing the future, my friend.
3:1 for horizontal vs vertical is quite dangerous, I guess the sport will get somewhat safer as this ratio improves, but it will take more material research probably
>Isn't that kind of a subjective opinion?

I wasn't using it as such. If an economist gets the ear of a president, is employed by the ECB (as the above economists were) or a column in the New York Times they're 'respectable'.

>Liberals love to push Keynes economic theories and hold him up as some kind of expert.

Conservatives use his theories too. Republican politicians who fight tooth and nail for military spending in their districts know exactly what they're doing and why.

>Even in these circles it would be hard to find someone who's actually objective about what they're seeing.

A good litmus test of this is to look at their predictions and see how they stack up to reality.

Some predictions are just bad, some are so persistently awful that they indicate that the economist has incentives that lead them to tell flat out lies.

The above graph is a good example of that.
Please, name me one person who started base jumping off a cliff, and not jumping out of an aircraft.
> "this is something you learn in skydiving class…You learn on your first day that if you hug the beach ball, you will flip and fall with your back down"

This is true of the first 20 or so jumps, before achieving your "A" licence or equivalent: you're taught a belly-down arch.

When you advance past your A-licence, and especially when studying for your FS1 qualification (Formation Skydiving), you're taught variations of that arch, which are much flatter and even concave, in order to adjust fall-rate, so that you can stay in formation, with everyone falling at the same speed.

You also figure out very quickly that those slower fall-rate body positions are much less stable in the airflow…but that's why we practice.
The problem with this argument is it assumes you can get to infinity 9s by adding them one-by-one.

It's like adding sides to a regular polygon to get to a circle. No matter how many sides you add, you still have a polygon. You can only say that a circle is a polygon with infinity sides, but you'll never get there adding them one by one.
It is completely subjective, but it's also obvious that the Keynesians won that battle a long time ago. Go into any classroom, economics conference, FOMC meeting, etc. Keynesian theories enjoy the status of being unassailable, objective facts. Austrian and other schools of thought are mocked, derided and dismissed wholesale.
Homebrew is a killer app for MacOS right now. I could switch back to Linux on the desktop (and spent quite a bit time investigating the possibility), but it could actually be harder to keep my Open Source tools up to date. Linuxbrew exists, but Homebrew is a proven and well-supported system.

The other key third-party app for me, oddly, turned out to be the Microsoft RDP client. I'm paid to manage servers, and unfortunately, some of those are Windows, so I need a totally reliable RDP client.

I also don't care about GUI theming, but I do care about readability, and MacOS on a machine with a Retina display delivers totally crisp font rendering. Linux is now constantly getting better, but I don't think that it could match MacOS yet, even on a machine with an equivalent display.
Mapv – a library of geography visualization
The G1 Garbage Collector
They don't have any warehouse in Austria. This page has as far as I know the location of all their warehouses: http://www.mwpvl.com/html/amazon_com.html

The location printed on the label is the place they hand over the package (trucked from somewhere). I'm a bit surprised they seem to do that in such a volume in Salzburg. Previously they mostly used Allhaming (usually called Linz on packages).

For example, most my packages in Germany are labelled "Radefeld - Direct" but they originate from Poland or the Czech Republic, not the Amazon logistics center near that.

They also print a return address on the labels which is often another place distinct from outbound delivery (mostly Graben for me). Amazon uses multiple locations to accept packages and forward them to their warehouses.

I don't know anything about their same-day logistics though. It's the first time I hear that for Austrian addresses and no mention on their homepage, too.
Yes, the clergy/court astrologer comparison is very apt.

A few are more like engineers (e.g. see Steve Keen's work) but they're not the ones who get the plum jobs in government, powerful NGOs or banks - they tend to be professors in backwater universities.
I remember Ed Kemmet saying that NUMA optimizations are patent encumbered and presumably licensed. Probably part of the reason this is closed source.
Latched onto Vanguard Funds when I was 23 haven't looked back. Combination of low fees and getting averages has worked out well.

Key thing is to put money in every time you have a chance (and even when you don't). The long term of growth makes a difference even for small amounts. If you have a child in your circle consider getting an account open for them. Rather than that shirt or toy you were going give, put that money in the account.
> Also the population density of Finland isn't exactly staggering

Except the excuse you hear from Americans in every single thread about mobile tech is "Oh but the US has such a low population density! Obviously our service must be crap and cost a shitload!"
Wah.

>The vast majority of your lifetime income will come from a dozen or fewer opportunities that you happen to be in a position to take advantage of, whether it's a new job offer or a high-profile project you volunteer for or a startup that takes off

Is this really true? I'm still way too early in my career to know. But I'd have thought if you stick with the more "traditional" route, your income would be fairly consistent (as opposed to something similar to the startup lottery, for example).
This is another problem with switching to linux. When somebody makes a perfectly cogent complaint that hundreds of other people have also experienced, the popular refrain among linux zealots is "It works for me. You must be doing it wrong." That must be nice for you, but that type of response makes the rest of us gladly run back to Windows. At least when we complain about bad windows features, we're not going to get gaslit.
Pseudo science with an academic veneer.
At least twelve people I used to know would say skydiving is super dangerous, if they were still alive. I don't disagree with you, but you're expressing (as well as disagreeing with) an opinion and subjective language.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say exactly. You've disagree but not clarified. Are you saying skydiving is safe? It is objectively, demonstrably not "safe". Unless you define safe to mean it's possible to do once without dying.

Your perceived safety level depends on how you measure it. You can measure deaths per participant, in which skydiving compares favorably to some other sports. You can also measure deaths per participation-hour, which some people feel is a much more accurate and fair way to measure, and in that case skydiving looks a lot more dangerous.

No matter how you measure it, and no matter what license and training you have, skydiving is quite risky. I have a USPA C license, and every single person I've known who died skydiving had a D license (more than 500 jumps).
Skydiving is known for being very safe. Safer than american football, boxing, scuba diving, motorbike racing, and many other sports [0]

[0] http://www.besthealthdegrees.com/health-risks/
Great Trail FAQ
With history, at least, if you want to understand how the world is in the state it is in today, you need to understand how it got here.
Apple’s self-inflicted naming dilemma
Whoa there buddy, slow your roll.

I used non-specific and subjective language.

Please tell me how skydiving ranks against boxing per participation-hour.

EDIT: The comment above used to say "stop spreading lies". That's why I said "slow your roll", I was being called a liar for expressing my opinion.

Now that he edited his comment, mine looks bitchy. But maybe you can stop downvoting me anyway?
And a physical analogue: The potential impact of breaking and entering is massive...

So, B&E is a relatively minor offence, it's the crimes that follow (theft, destruction of property, etc) that are significant. The same should apply for a cyber-B&E. In fact do you even need a law for breaking into a computer? I wonder if we could simply revise the traditional B&E definition to apply to computers as well.
When the Means Have Reached Their End
Presumably they could've also gone back to a gold and silver standard. (This would be a terrible idea for other reasons, but it wouldn't inflate, right?)
Great article, plus it's spot-on on what I wanted to demonstrate. From your article:

> It’s not uncommon to see males in rural medicine raking in dollars by performing the lucrative procedural work…with their ability to provide such a service entirely dependent on female colleagues keeping the practice afloat by trudging through the toil of family medicine.

I see the website isn't exempt from reinforcing prejudices against males and generalizations. Isn't trying to determine which gender is better, just, plainly, an outdated practice?

Women have complained that society doesn't give them enough self-confidence, which hurts their choice for STEM. As a male, I feel hurt everytime a feminist article assigns specific qualities to women and defects to males.

You see, I've personally lacked self-confidence in my career, which means I didn't succeed to reach the job I wanted in the economy. Now I often ask "Tell me 10 qualities of women" then "Tell me 10 qualities of males".

I reliably get, whether the interviewee is a male or female, 10 qualities of women being smarter and only 1 for males: Strength. That is, we're depicted as testosterone with little brains. How can we, males, progress in companies if people see women as inherently more clever?