skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Really naive to think that supporting a political party and supporting Trump are the same. Of course, Peter Thiel does not support the BS that Trump says. It would be a huge contradiction coming from the same man that took down Gawker. If there was no single reason why people are supporting Trump, it is American's version of Brexit, by voting Trump people are protesting the massive economic chaos in the USA. They aren't hoping Trump will fix it. The opposite, they are hoping Trump will fail miserably, which will effectively hit the reset button on the American economy.
Yes, logging and fishing are the most dangerous professions by far according to [1].

[1] http://time.com/4326676/dangerous-jobs-america/
I don't have to worry about it. I can just read threads on Hacker News and see people rationalize Thiel's involvement and suggest that it implies a Trump Presidency is less dangerous than we think it is. I can look at this exact thread and see numerous people arguing that Trump isn't dangerous at all.

People can believe what they want. But Altman and Graham have a stated objective to convince people not to support Donald Trump. I'm doing them no favors by hiding the fact of how their actions work against that goal.
this is disgusting. This is really the only press these emails are getting? There is main stream corruption in these emails, law breaking, lobbyist, ambassador appointments based on CASH, colluding and democracy being flushed down the drain and this is what they report on?

Disgusting.

For an IN DEPTH look at what the emails really show: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/583hpd/new_wiki...
I think you're leaning way too hard in the other direction. There's a balance that needs to be struck. A detail-oriented person may have an excellent understanding of where they stand today but have little thought for their trajectory, while a big picture person is the opposite.

It's rare for any individual to embody both aspects, so you usually pair these people up. For example: the strategic CEO + managerial COO. I've seen CTO/CIO combos with the same dynamic.

Just because someone resembles one more than the other does not mean the other is not just as important.
I think you read the atheist situation incorrectly. When any group grows so large it splits. There are more atheists in the US than ever and the polls indicate that number is growing.

The majority of atheists never had the goal of maintaining one large political power base, and the authors you mentioned mostly wanted adults to stop believing in fairy tales and wanted little to do with political power.

I don't see any failure in atheism other than the amount of time it is taking to gain societal acceptance in the south, which seems to have nothing to do with this discussion.
Are you trying to say that the real issue here is bias against the rich and powerful?
Assange is still living and being protected there, right?

This is the important support.
> if X were worthwhile, X would already be happening; as X is not happening, it cannot be worthwhile

You misquote me. I make no such value judgment.

My original argument: If recycling were more efficient, it would be privately profitable, and a competitive recycling market would develop.

If we as a society believe recycling to be worthwhile, we should work to increase the efficiency of recycling to >5% to cover the costs associated with recycling. Alternatively we could continue to subsidize the logistical costs of recycling as we do now.
Really? https://github.com/npm/npm/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed would seem to suggest otherwise. Should I be looking elsewhere? Is there something I'm not seeing here?
I am completely morally comfortable with the idea of YC opposing a $1.25 million handout to the candidate of mass deportation.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." - Karl Popper
Cross Platform Office Alternative
I agree with your first two sentences, but I think we'll figure this out within another generation.
I have a lot of respect for founders that are willing to do this style of post: "here are a bunch of our competitors that you might also consider".

It's easy enough to find many of them in 20 minutes of searching anyway, but you just saved me that time, and assuming the list is pretty complete (which seems to be the case), now I trust your company much more for having published this resource.
I think I am.

If you’ll scroll to the end of the linked document, you’ll read docker says windows containers is beta feature not yet available on stable builds.

Also, there’s output of docker version command that clearly says OS/Arch: linux/amd64.
The biggest technical difference is the mostly immutable history, which is a feature or a drawback depending on who you talk to.

More subjectively, most people I've chatted to about it seem to find Mercurial's interface much easier to grok / pick up as a new user than Git's (which is somewhat notorious for its quirks).

There are other differences, but these stand out to me. That said, I use Git because adoption + community (and my experience with hg-git has been less successful than some... though it's been a while since I gave it a spin)
They've already made it hard enough to make sure legit email ends up in the inbox of a gmail-recipient, rather than being silently flagged as spam -- that anyone hosting their own mail needs to consider if they need to special-case delivery for gmail recipients (I've considered routing gmail-destinations through authenticated smtp to gmail via a gmail-account - then realized that that was just silly and I feel better when gmail doesn't work -- but I don't depend on delivering my (private) email for revenue). Add to that the fact that google is one of few big email providers that are hard to grey-list (or rather automatically white-list once delivery has started) -- and they've already made a great effort of siloing off one of their arguably most open services.

If you think the megacorp that doesn't do customer support is going to be any easier to dislodge at other levels in the stack, once they manage to squeeze themselves in by undercutting the market, I'm afraid you're hopelessly naive.
Before the industrial revolution, almost all manufacturing of common goods, including food, was performed by human hands and feet. This limited output capacity to that of human strength and endurance; and it was exhausting for humans, preventing most humans from having time or energy for intellectual activities.

On the contrary, there were a handful of areas where humans had already begun to exploit motion and force outside of human muscle to carry out work. One long-time example is using horses, mules, and other animals to provide force for transporting goods over distances. Even humans were payloads transported upon animal backs. Another key advancement for humans was using water and wind to transport large amounts of goods from one place to another. Sailboats allowed for transporting of goods a very long distance. In today's age we may take self-driving transport for granted, but once upon a time humans actually had to transport goods by hand and foot.

Why the industrial revolution was a powerful next step in exploiting nature is because it allowed not only transport of goods, but also finer, more complex tasks to be carried out without requiring human muscle. Now sewing, grinding, cutting, molding, bending, digging, and drilling could be done by machine in large quantities with good reproducibility.

Hence, first humans exploited nature (and other animals) for transporting goods. Then humans began exploiting oil, coal, and electricity for carrying out more complex physical tasks that require large amounts of force. As machines grew finer, they were able to manufacture smaller, more precise goods.

The next stage was to allow humans to carry out not only large scale physical tasks without continuous human effort, but also to carry out intellectual tasks in mass without continuous human effort. This is where computers come in. They exploit nature to get information processed quickly and reliably.

At least a few areas remain where humans are doing the heavy lifting. One is reproduction. Humans are still required to take care of new humans while they are brought from incapacity to self sufficiency. This is still a difficult, time-consuming task, especially if the goal is having quality output. Another area where humans still do heavy lifting is learning. Unfortunately learning has not become much more efficient or quicker than it was in the past. Humans are very slow at learning, and a massive human effort is generally involved.
The problem is that more and more low-level jobs are going to be automated away in the coming years, and that's going to leave a lot of people without jobs available that pay sufficiently to allow them to survive. Truck drivers, burger flippers, fruit pickers, various clerical workers, and many more will be out of a job because those jobs can be done better and cheaper by robots; at best, they'll have one worker overseeing the robots and making sure they work right, and coordinating between them. The computer you wrote this comment on was mostly built with robotic labor: no one populates modern circuit boards by hand.

So yes, work is less and less necessary, regardless of your religious beliefs to the contrary. No, not all work is going to go away; we'll still need engineers for a long time (unless they invent human-level AIs to do the engineering work for us). But not everyone is capable of being an engineer or doctor or other worker requiring significant education; most people just aren't capable of those jobs.

The other big factor is: how much work? Why do we need to work 40 hours a week or more? With more work being done by automation, and our productivity at the highest point in history, when can we finally take more time off and do enjoyable things instead of putting in "face time" at a workplace because of the quaint notion of hourly pay? Why are we not all benefitting from automated labor making our lives easier and more luxurious?
I am fond of Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark".
Unfortunately, this isn't new, either, and happens by the courts as well. I still cannot comprehend how the draft does not violate the 13th Amendment. Reading the court cases, the argument seems to be "We know that involuntary servitude is forbidden, but surely they didn't mean this kind of involuntary servitude."
The title is a little misleading. The screenshot shows that Google is showing that "prices will likely increase" which is different than the "fares will increase" in the title. "fares might increase" would be more appropriate here.
Node.js 7 set for release next week
Welcome to HN! I feel hopeful when I see passionate comments like this from newly minted adults :)
Please explain this, I really don't understand this argument:

>> I find Guantanamo morally indefensible.

Guantanamo -- afaik, you can keep enemy combatants in prison until after the war. E.g. the conflict in Afghanistan is still active. So what is the problem?

(Then we have the whole point about the people at Guantanamo being combatants that didn't follow the war of laws. Do they have any rights, at all? Please use very good primary sources if you somehow argue that combatants that targets civilians have more rights than prisoners of war... That is contradicting the idea of those laws.)
I think at least JetBlue is already trying to do this.

This is the daily price graph for a recent flight I was watching. Often the price was changing hugely multiple times per day.

http://imgur.com/a/qaxrX
Yes. This is the similar point about Brexit. When the Brexit vote was on, instead of seeing that the Brexit leave people had some points that they wanted address, the remain people vilified them. Making sure that none of the points they wanted to get across was address. This furthered the gap and caused the divide.

The people who voted Brexit leave were disillusioned voters who think the current system is bad and their voices weren't being heard. But the remain camp instead of listening to them, pushed them away. The leave vote was a form of dissent from people who were upset with the current system. Yes they might have been racists amongst them, but they courted people who were excluded.
There aren't many non-european Americans willing to live in Scandinavia or europe over the US barring extraordinary circumstances. A significant amount of foreign, non 'white', skill prefers the US over say Norway. Considering that, "socialism" in the context of Scandinavia,europe, etc isn't an attractive option by a long shot in a more global, and highly diverse 'market'. The benefits of a selective style of socialism like Norway may be attractive to say similar mindsets and cultural effects comfortable with a homogenous idealism of utopia, but having the benefits of a highly diverse and varying mindsets and cultures has its own positive effects even with the negatives.

Sadly in the US, the idealisms of socialism often also comes with certain european-centric identities, or commonly bastardized into race ideologies where their proponents emphasize a socialist "utopia" like Scandinavia. These people emphasize this socialism on the basis of certain similar attributes where they can afford such promises to a small percentage, through the removal or exclusion of those they decide are not like them.

Breaking down the US economic system, one would be quick to notice that there does indeed exist a kind of socialist utopia much inline with euro-centric ideologies. One that even dwarfs the so called socialist bastion of Scandinavia and europe.
If you have a ton of files inside of one gigantic repo, the work facebook is doing on mercurial might help you out.

If you live in a saner world though, you'll probably benefit more from git's superior cli & tooling
This is the oligarch-gods of politics warring. Frankly, as long as they stick to hurting one another and leave the little people alone, I consider smacking one another around their role. They want to throw their incredible amounts of money and influence around for an outsize effect on elections, they should be ready for that money and influence to be threatened as fair game in the political battle. They can always not do that and participate like a mere mortal.

This is hardly arbitrary. People choosing to participate in this arena are not on the same playing field as the rest of us. I don't feel that applying identical rules to them as the "little guys" is somehow more fair than applying what is appropriate. Again: no one makes them use their power this way. Challenging the basis of that power is 100% OK in my book if that's how they want to use it. They dragged their professional reputations and fortunes into the mud. Complaining that it got dirty is silly.
Thanks for the feedback. I imagine an ipad pro with the stylus could probably catch him up on that. What caused the advanced reading age in your opinion?
> Are we to believe there is no line to be drawn, anywhere on this continuum?

The problem is that the line being proposed here separates roughly 50% of the population of America, possibly more. You are basically saying "I know that even though I may technically be in a minority, my moral convictions are so strong that I must impose them on you and deter you from your way of thinking by any means necessary, even if it means firing you from your job."
If you strictly interpret the constitution, a great deal of federal agencies and actions are clearly disallowed, but these restrictions have been gradually eroded (most notably during and since the 1930s). The US government is supposed to be one of enumerated powers, and it was never granted the power to create anything like the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, or the Federal Electoral Commission. There is no provision for any warrant-less searches (which violate the Fourth Amendment), and campaign finance laws clearly violate the First Amendment (strictly read). Delegation of the power to criminalize activities is also not allowed by the constitution, yet there are thousands of regulatory crimes. The Tenth Amendment is clearly a dead-letter now.
This whole election is very well produced dark comedy.
Add to the list of distractions: work situations that have a policy requiring a developer to keep a chat or messaging app open and monitored while working, either at the office or at home.
> I consider Obama one of the best most rational presidents the US have ever had.
> But that rationality also gave us execution by drone without trial.

Well, no; technology gave us drones, not rationality. The US has always killed what it identifies as enemy combatants without a trial, whether its through war, covert operations or drones. Obama at least doesn't match the death count of the Bush years.
> When you call cust sup in Europe, the service is way worst.

I remember a sign at a Mac Donald's in New York that said something like "if the waiter doesn't smile, you get a free burger". In Europe you may not get the forced smile, but it doesn't mean the service is worse. Overall, I'd say the service is slightly better in the US, but you can see it's totally fake and I find it a little bit disturbing.
Every political research product is funded by someone with an agenda. GAI, Brookings, Cato, Heritage, take your pick.

Funding should always be considered, but is not cause to discount otherwise valid methodologies and findings.
That's a discipline issue though... shared nothing start from zero... The "docker" method doesn't upgrade an app already running in a container, it creates a new one.
I'm trying to figure out a way to address your comment in a constructive way. Does "wait at least 8" imply doing nothing now? That's how I read your comment, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think there's a quick and easy solution. Everything's not going to be changed overnight--even if we all agreed on what the final state should look like. I'd like to think we can figure out ways to move forward in the direction we generally want to go, knowing that it'll take a while to get there.

I do think only waiting is going to make things worse, harder to change as time goes by and the current situation becomes even more entrenched.

There are multiple projects here, too. One is to increase transparency. Another is to identify common goals that have support across the divides we currently see. I'm sure there are others. Identifying common goals and building support is something I don't think we need to wait for.

I apologize if I've put words in your mouth. Please correct me if I have.

Edit: Added thoughts on actions to start now.
what are your interests? are you located near YC?
Recycling is more prevalent in "third world" countries due to a relatively cheap supply of human labor. Recycling is an extremely labor-intensive process.

"YOU WON'T FIND a Chinese version of Alan Bachrach [US recycling entrepreneur], just as you won't find an Indian, Kenyan, Vietnamese, or Jordanian one, either. The reason is that most of the world remains poor enough to justify employing people to do what Alan does with star screens and air guns.

Consider what happens every night in the courtyard of the Shanghai high-rise where I live. Just past midnight you'll likely hear the clank of a bottle bouncing across concrete. If you follow that bounce back to its source, you'll come to a concrete hut, not much larger than a single-car garage, from which fragrant trash has been spilled several feet into the narrow asphalt road. It doesn't look like American trash: there are few boxes, cans, or bottles. Rather, it's mostly food waste — peels, husks, bones.

Move a little closer, and you might see two or three hunched shadows atop the oozing mess, canvas bags swung over their shoulders, scrounging through it with bare hands, searching for metal cans, plastic bottles, or perhaps something better yet — a stray coin. They're not Shanghainese but often families of poor migrants from farms in the less wealthy provinces, making the best living that they can.

Families that pick through trash in the middle of the night are just the last screen in a profit-driven process that, if you wait outside my building through the night, begins at the gate at first light. There you'll see a squat and brawny migrant woman wearing a fanny pack stuffed with small money, and carrying a small hand scale. If anyone is the Chinese equivalent of Alan Bachrach, presiding over a system that harvests recyclables from the trash, she is it. Her destination is the pile of cardboard tied with twine that's waited beneath the night watchman's gaze, and a waist-high balance scale of the sort that you might find in a doctor's office. As she pulls out the big scale, the early-rising old ladies in my building wander downstairs carrying a few plastic bottles, perhaps a small cardboard box or two, and maybe a small plastic bag filled with cans. The bottles and cans are priced individually; the boxes are attached to a small hook on the hand scale and weighed. Payment is equivalent to a few pennies, which the early risers take to the wet market, in search of the day's vegetables...

There's no need for single-stream schemes to raise the recycling rate in Chinese cities because, in the end, my Chinese neighbors have something that most Americans don't: a recognition that "the recycling" is worth more than virtue.

It's worth money."

http://theweek.com/articles/455486/inside-world-forprofit-re...
Human Gut Micro Flora Gives an Index of Obesity
Bots aren't ready to be bankers: Preparing for fintech's next-gen chatbots
I find it a lot more convenient when everything is just vendored
> donations are free speech

It's a donation so large that it would be impossible for the vast majority of Americans to participate in the same conversation. I question the decision to categorize it as pure free speech. It's qualitatively different from a $100 donation.
Hopefully, in the near future, we can just slap a recursive SNARK on scrypt (or any memory hard hash function for that matter) and call it a day.
It's common in the US, and institutionalized to the point that the homeowner is in no danger of the 'landlord' revoking the lease. It is frequently historical and in such cases most states require by law the landholder to 'sell' the land to the homeowner on request, usually for a trifling sum. The term for this in the mid-Atlantic is "ground rent," if you want to look for more info.
From what I understand of the US Constitution, there is a very good degree of separation of powers along with checks and balances to make this very difficult to implement in a practical sense, and would necessarily require both houses of congress as well as the supreme court to all be complicit in the act, thus requiring more than just one immoral person to pull off.
To be fair, I thought it wasn't actually Hillary that suggested that. But yes, Obama has ordered quite a few strikes.
Almost every site offers this. Isn't this unhelpful in the last ng run? Consumer behavior will change and the price will smooth out or the window of lower prices will be gone or the percentage of change will become smaller.
The big advantage to call out is that they found Mercurial much easier to add extensions to and more receptive to their issues with large monorepos. (For an idea of the scale, Facebook's repository I have heard is ~10× the size of mozilla-central, which is probably the largest public Mercurial repository.)
For those with complaints about the list... Make a pull request and help others out!