skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hard to find a comment by you not in oblivion but I'm trolling for nobody :

Former NSA staffer and famous whistleblower, William Binney, says the DNC hack was not done by Russia but by US Intelligence.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/nsa-whistleblower-says-dnc-ha...
Yeah. Those chips usually talk via SPI. There's interestingly a lot of options, including ways to boost quality. One sucky thing, is they use "dots per inch" which is just completely stupid and boneheaded - seriously... Inches?!

But the ones I'm using are the ADNS-5030 for an interesting project with 3d printing. Its max poll rate is 1MHz, which is damned quick for a Atmel328p chip- it leaves only 16 instructions per SPI poll. The chip's default is 500 DPI (grr again inches), but can be changed simply by popping a "1" in a register.I'm sure different chips have much better qualities.

Also, you can pull out the dX and dY registers for relative travel since last sample. But you can also pull 256 times to get a 7bit grayscale picture of the mouse sensor! ADNS-5030 is a 16x16 7bit grayscale. And even the 'duino can pull that with relative ease and display in Processing. You can also display the fiduciary markers in which the optical analysis system determines as travel (how it gets the dX and dY).

But yeah, this article is kind worthless. Sorry. Anyways, videos can be a really bad way to pack little content in a lot of time and bandwidth. :/
Isn't the fact that they're making it clear that they're against Trump enough? Why do you think they need to also be against Thiel, "just" because of his political activities?

Clearly everyone would find it incredibly wrong if someone would withdraw support for someone just because they supported Hillary Clinton, and while most people here think Trump is much worse, he is the head of one of the 2 major parties. You might not like it, but his actions and views do represent a significant portion of the mainstream (which is why this isn't the same as supporting someone from the KKK, which does thankfully lie outside the mainstream).

Note: I am in no way endorsing or defending Trump, or Thiel.
and not voting is also "voting for evil", since a non-vote is effectively a vote for the front-runner. :-)
I call BS. Do you have any sources to back up this claim?
If Jill Stein gets 5% of the vote, she will be eligible for millions of dollars in federal funding in 2020.
This is the most important page on your website
Just wrote about this in another thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12721396

But I would highly recommend the syndication route if it's likely to gain pickup through that method.
What? No I didn't. I wrote "he could be". It's right there.
Looks pretty simple and useful
Trying to protect against another mortgage meltdown is just ambulance chasing, at current liquidity markets are inherently unstable and highly sensitive to the number of trades[1]. Since HFT artificially drives up the number of trades, but despite this is orders of magnitude away from providing enough instantaneous liquidity, taxing them to death makes sense.

[1] http://video.albanova.se/arc2016_14.html

As a side note, after listening to this lecture about the inherent instability of markets, the first guy to ask a question is some sort of trader that wonders if there is any way to make "free money" from the theoretical work presented, shows how social issues is always at the forefront of the financial industry.
SubmitHub as a product is 10 months old, and Jason's only been charging for the past 7 months. So saying that "under as year" is a "very disingenuous" timeline is... very disingenuous.

Yes, having a successful blog helped Jason identify and understand the problem, and it saved him from having to partner with someone else's blog. But learning to code was probably pivotal, too. Where do we draw the line?
You're making a lot of assumptions. I'm a Hillary supporter and because I am, I'm in a bubble of them and I see a lot condemnation and shunning of Trump supporters - more than I see of Hillary supporters.

The fact that you assume that I am the one who feels persecuted says a lot.

Hint: the faulty assumptions we make of others strengthen our bubbles.
DHH: Although Thiel would already have been on a Performance Improvement Plan
for his legal wars against the press. So easy move

What the fuck.
Express Logger that's nicely colorized and includes Request Body
"If you do, that's fine, but all that pompous talk about puritanism and McCarthysm is misdirected."

On the contrary. Self-described Marxist regimes murdered over 100 million people in the last century (far more than the Nazis). So by your reasoning it's okay to fire anyone who's a Marxist?
Let's put this in its political context. We are citizens of a constitutional republic. A republic, as far as I understand it, implies that a (thoughtful, responsible, .., elected) minority is afforded the delegated power to legislate, judge, and administer.

The 'actual problem' seems to be in the selection/delegation process. The minority that is currently in charge has framed the question as that of "safety and security" vs liberties ("freedoms"). The corporate media (aka "journalists" and "free press") is more than happy to support this thesis. The "people", lets be frank here, were never expected to be a nation of Jeffersons. And it is unreasonable to expect them to be astute techno-political scientists carefully weighing various implications of technology and policy.

Other unelected minorities -- corporations such as Apple, Google, Facebook, ... -- could by fiat choose to only offer goods that preserve our liberties. They chose not to do so and arguably they are not under an obligation to do so. (Note arguably.)

Other unelected minorities -- technologists that work for the above -- have also elected to lend their talents to produce these systems, platforms, and devices that erode our liberties. Again, arguably they don't really have much choice in the matter, as we all must pay the proverbial rent.

So, imho, beyond the cliche that 'a people deserve their government' (which is a congenital defect of a political body), there remains the framework that was intended to select the best and brightest minority that would be entrusted with carefully considering various options. It is this framework that is currently broken. I accuse our so called "free press" for a playing a substantial role in the dysfunction of our political system.

There are other responsible parties for sure, but the press and media play a critical role in knowingly confusing and frightening the majority -- a role known as agitprop in the USSR.

[edit: noop cleanup]
As Far as Your Brain Is Concerned, Audiobooks Are Not ‘Cheating’
This is a good point, but you get the same from standard Hex notation.

But standard Hex notation has the advantage that I can say FF to someone, but how do I pronounce these things? I guess this could have merit, but I just don't have much of an issue using standard Hex notation.
A good reason to have a timer on the fingerprint authentication mode, so after eg half an hour you have to type your pin too.

This would also help them remember their pin which people can forget amazingly easily... It can be weeks between using it on iOS.
Except it wasn't a great investment. Unless he was doing something great besides research.

If you put in amazing groundbreaking work in the first years of a startup and then started slacking off. How long before the company that you helped build has a right to kick you to the curb? A year? Five? More? How about 30?

5 papers, even good ones is pitiful for 30 years. Sure, it's possible that they were the culmination of long brilliant research projects. If that's the case then great. If it wasn't then the University has every right to ask what's up, which they did and decided to keep him on anyway.
If you never change any files outside of the ones you own (i.e. the ones owned by "root"), you don't need to back them up, right? For example, if I never touch any of the files under C:\Windows, I have no need to back up that folder (especially the files owned by SYSTEM that you can't access).
3-4 hours a chapter, just like in college. Math books more, books in a domain I'm familiar with less.
Please accept my apologies then, this is something that I have often seen followed by a direct attack on his electorate's intelligence and/or how democracy is not working since those poor uneducated masses are given a voice. Same happened after Brexit (and some lunatics arguing that London should become a city-state). So because it matched part of the pattern, I assumed this is where you wanted to take the discussion.

Anyway, have a nice afternoon.
I'll accept the onus and point you toward my tackling that matter in some depth in another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12720879

Edit: Please forgive posting a link to another comment. I'm pointing to the other comment only because I feel it is quite thorough, and am not sure the conversation is helped by duplicating the same sentiments, thoughts, and questions.

Edit 2: I hope my consideration of the issues and perspectives can pass the smell test of invoking a semantic argument. I genuinely find this particular issue to be one that is nuanced and important, and do not wish to subvert reasoned consideration by quibbling too much over words. Suffice to say, I think this is far more a matter of situational and conceptual difference, not just whether we should rightly use a word to indicate a thing.
No, these are good patterns. You've taken an otherwise large chunk of code and broken it down into comprehensible pieces that can be composed together and tested individually. This also leads nicely into refactors, where you can extract these smaller chunks into new components when your old component is handling too many responsibilities.

Unfortunately if control flow gets bolted onto JSX we can expect to see a lot less of this. Others will assume that this is the way business is done. That is, creating hundreds of lines of hard to follow conditionalized pseudo XML. I realize this already occurs in more bastardized forms, but it shouldn't be encouraged by new language features.
It's disingenuous to suggest, as you do in your tweets where you warn women and Muslims against joining YC, that because one of their partners donated to Trump and spoke at his convention, YC as an institution is now somehow poisoned with the views typical of a Trump supporter. Presumably Thiel was added as a partner for the simple reason that he is a valuable source of advice for startups.

This is answering the wrong question. The point as I took it of idlewords' warning is rather, if you are a woman, or a Muslim, do you really want to work with a company where you might be expected to deal with Thiel as a consultant?

You say so yourself, as did sama and paulg: Thiel's role in YC is to advise startups who enter into the program.

Were I a woman, I would be uncomfortable taking money from YC on the contingency that I would have to do business with someone who believes that my gender being given the right to vote undermines the entirety of democracy.

Were I a Muslim or a Mexican, I would be uncomfortable taking money from an organization that might expect me to share business information with a man who has spent millions of his own money supporting a candidate who believes that people of my religion or race should be registered with the government and deported en masse.

Indeed, why should I, or anyone, want to do business with someone who hates them? Who sees them as subhuman? Or, since I'm sure you're about to rush to equivocate on this, at least actively campaigns for, delegates for, and finances, a political machine that does so?

idlewords' advice was, frankly, exactly right. If you are a Muslim, or a Mexican, or a woman, you should think very carefully about applying for YC, knowing that Peter Thiel is the kind of advisor you may be expected to cooperate with as a contingency of your funding.
"Cops don't act in anyone's interest, they act to enforce the law. Because they are bound by the law, they have a monopoly on the use of force. At least that's the theory. If you're the mafia and want someone to do the bone breaking for you, you can't hire a cop, you hire a thug. Such as this man."

Repugnant.

The police don't have a monopoly on anything and are not a 'mafia' any more than Barack Obama is the head of a giant 'mafia'.

" And he appeared thoroughly confused about what he was doing and on whose behalf. " - this is the fault of the Library and the Speaker - not the cop.

"The library clearly isn't pressing charges for "resisting arrest"" - the Library can't 'press or not' for this kind of charge. It's not an offence against them, i.e. robbery.

"and second because only the police state can press this particular kind of charge." - no - every civilized nation in the world can 'press charges' for 'resisting arrest'.

There is a lot of ambiguity in this article, it's not clear what happened, and it only serves as fodder for cop-haters and anti-government lunatics to troll.
From : http://deeconometrist.nl/?p=3623

"Before the rise of HFT, when old school brokers were the ones doing the market making on the trading floor, the difference between the buy and the sell price was about twenty-five times larger than it is today."

The other thing is that HFT firms make less money all together than Goldman Sachs does on its own:

"From 2011 onwards, HFT has been on the decline. In 2009, high-frequency traders moved about 3.25 billion shares a day. In 2012, it was 1.6 billion. Not only did the trade volume decrease, HFT firms profit has also been diminished since its heyday. In 2009, the entire HFT industry made around $5 billion trading stocks. In 2013, this was around $1.3 billion before expenses. Today, HFT companies seem to disappear just as fast as they appeared. Its most notable case might be that of Goldman Sachs selling its HFT department recently. This department, which it acquired in 2000 for $6.5 billion, yielded them a mere 30 million this present day."

The big investment banks hate HFT firms because they have destroyed their spreads on trades. They push out arguments to get rid of them so they can return too the good old days of making sure they get a cut of each trade.

Who pays the Clintons hundreds of thousands for a 'speech'? The investment banks. Not HFT firms, they make too little money and compete too hard.
You can care about your countries politics and not support either primary candidate, or the political structures they represent.

Supporting the lesser of evils is still supporting evil and going along with it as the new status quo just prolongs and reinforces your problem IMO, because it makes them legitimate. The fact there is so much hostility against the idea of rejecting both parties is a big reason why the standards have reached such a low point, where Trump/Clinton are the best available options and people are just okay with that.

People prefer to rabidly support the red/blue teams blindly while the majority of the western world has far more healthier functioning multi-party political systems and more advanced electoral systems.

Even though polling shows the average person doesn't like nor trust either candidates it's rare to find news articles in US papers about the poor state of politics and the need for reform (not just deciding to attack one side or the other). Maybe Trump has been too much of a distraction away from the higher level downward-spiral America politics faces.

Unless there is some resistance and holding everyone to higher standards, it's just going to continue like this. America has swung to the other side of the pendelum from their political ideology of the 1750-early 1900s where the status quo governance systems was constantly questioned to now having a culture of doubling down with lost causes, fighting a war of attrition from the trenches while both sides lose. I'd rather not be wasting my life in the trenches TYVM.
A locked phone is a lot less interesting to a burglar. If the convenience of touch ID means more people lock their phones, that's not an empty promise.
>﻿ ﻿According to Erickson, a woman who appeared at a protest carrying a microphone emblazoned with the name Democracy Now! and trailing a video crew; who can be heard in the resulting video report identifying herself to a security guard as a reporter; and who then broadcast the video on the daily news program she has hosted for 20 years is not actually a journalist. She is not a journalist, because she harbors a strong perspective, and that perspective clashes with his own.

Sooner or later regular citizens are going to apply this same logic, and realize that uniformed, badge carrying police are not actually police, but are actually terrorists.

I shudder to think what will happen when that day comes.
Right. I'm not comfortable with this idea of big data being dependent on the actual file size of the data. There really are problems where doing stuff like reading files or using a relational database break down and you need something else that's more specialized in solving a problem even if the dataset is just a couple GBs. (So in my mind big data is a reference to specific tools or approaches like map-reduce, etc.)
I'd defer to cosmosnicolaou there, as I've not been involved in some months. Check out his answer below.

Also might be worth asking on our mailing list https://groups.google.com/a/v.io/forum/#!forum/vanadium-disc...
That is just anecdotal evidence. You need many more samples to be convincing.
pretty interesting!
The main reason multiprop electric drones are so cheap and popular is because you didn't need varipitch props any more. Petrol powered drones existed for decades but they were always more expensive and prone to failure than the new electric fixed prop multirotors.
Well, of course that's not the same. Thiel just thinks giving women the right to vote was democracy's greatest mistake. That's just a small thing to be brushed aside. But SOPA was something that could actually damage the economic prospects of corporations! Obviously you must take a stand when it's something that's actually important!

If the preceding barrage of sarcasm didn't make it clear enough, I'm quite disgusted with sama and Hacker News right now. Taking the high road like this is only possible when it's not your neck on the chopping block. Thiel thinks giving women the right to vote was a mistake; Trump thinks all Mexicans and Muslims are violent madmen who should be barred from entering the United States. Hacker News can gregariously see past these faults because they're not in the crosshairs, but if Shanley Kane were a YC partner and saying "all men support rape culture, even if indirectly", there's no friggin way this comment section would be so sanguine.
This is exceptionally true when the code I would have to rewrite is my build logic.
I doubt that you're confused, so much as confusing the issue for a reason, but what the hell. "No Thanks" refers not to carrying a child to term, but supporting a child who exists. Needless to say, you'll find some inequalities in situations which are unequal, and where one person assumes all of the biological burden, they get the call in regards to their own body. So yes, I clearly support abortion, and I just as clearly support the notion that a child carried to term has two parents who share the responsibility of raising that child. To clarify again, to avoid any "confusion", the logical equivalent of, "No thanks I'm not involved" is the woman leaving that child on the father's doorstep with a similar statement of disinterest.

Beyond that, be aware that your other posts on this topic are visible, so the "I'm confused... not trying to be difficult" lines ring especially hollow.
So basically the aphorism "perfect is the enemy of the good".
Wikileaks on Twitter:pre-commitment 1: John Kerry
The Ultimate LinkedIn Profile Cheat Sheet You Will Ever Need [Infographic]
No, it's not.

Any sufficiently complicated HN argument contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden implementation of half of John Rawls. This is a perfect example.

It is not liberalism to stand idly by while an intolerant faction attempts to seize political power. We are required to tolerate intolerance only as long as it doesn't pose a threat to the safety of society. In a just society, even if we can agree on little else, we should all be able to agree on about equality of citizenship and equality of opportunity. Trump campaigns, actively and enthusiastically, against these principles. He is, according to Sam Wang's predictive models, within the "strike zone" of potentially being elected President.

Were Trump like David Duke from 10 years ago, we'd be required to tolerate him despite his obvious intolerance towards us. But he's not: he's captured the support of tens of millions of American voters, all of whom are themselves enthusiastically supporting a platform that would create a religious test for entrance to the US, the "liberalization" of libel laws that would allow Trump to sue the New York Times for printing the claims of his sexual assault victims, and the incarceration of his political opponent. You don't have to take my word for this: that's what Paul Graham and Sam Altman think about him as well.

Trump is a real, urgent threat to the fabric of our civil society. We are obligated not to be passive about him. Society has a right to defend itself.
There are (at least) two views to this, I think. One view is that the personal and business aspects of a persons life are separate and one shouldn't necessarily affect the other, which is the argument that Sam Altman is making here. The second view is that they are definitely linked, and allowing someone to do something morally reprehensible (if you consider supporting Donald Trump that) means that they aren't with the vision of the company and it's fine to fire them.

The reality is that it depends on the level of the person in the organization (as well as the organization itself, but that's not part of this argument). For example, if a janitor supports Donald Trump, that doesn't really affect the business because no one outside the organization thinks that the janitor is representative of the organization as a whole. However, if a C-level employee did something that's considered morally reprehensible, it can affect the business because people associate the business with the people that run it.

In this case, I don't agree that Thiel should be "fired" because people wouldn't immediately associate Thiel with the company and he doesn't "work" full time with them (he's a part time partner). If Sam Altman had come out in support of Trump with a donation that would be a different story.