skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> A program the Swedish government embraced. Eliminating one of the main legal avenues for this is precisely the point.

It's not clear what "making whistleblowing specifically legal" would mean, or how it would achieve this.

> The prosecutor has deviated from standard procedures many times, and slandered Assange as a fugitive from justice despite that he cooperated with all their requests in the beginning.

None of this is true. You don't say anything in support of it, so I can't say much in response.

>There are many options here including serving the sentence in a country less likely to render the prisoner to a third jurisdiction. He's essentially serving a sentence in Ecuador already.

How would they get him out of the embassy to make him serve the sentence?

Plus, you know for sure that if they convicted Assange in absentia, he'd then start complaining that the verdict was invalid because he couldn't attend the trial!

>Any one of them can act according to their own morality and take an action that while illegal, serves the greater good from their PoV. Yes, it may result in their arrest and charges, but it saves the victim.

>Therefore vastly many people have the chance to sabotage an unjust process

The hypocrisy of this part of your comment is quite astonishing. You complain (falsely, I think) that the prosecutor hasn't followed "standard procedure", and yet you are urging others to ignore the law completely.
Kiiiiinda but not really?

You're forgetting about the implied sub-selection (or lack thereof), which then needs to be re-applied to the situation over which the group has power.

Take random small town A containing subgroup B, which holds most seats of power in town A. This is the same as: Subgroup B, as a class, having power, within town A.

So let's rephrase:
American men, as a class, have power in America.

Now, what happens if our sub-selection ISN'T a sub-selection, and is just "humanity"?
Human men, as a class, have power in humanity.

This is backed up by leadership statistics.

Now, I think what you're trying to say is: Correlation of the "man" attribute with power is the not the same as the "man" attribute causing power".

Again, this kinda makes sense, but, AFAIK/IMHO, so long as the attribute in question is disproportionately shared by the people with power vs the distribution amongst the population, that attribute IS causing some degree of the power held.
The difference is that a plane crash is largely out of your hands. Sending your child out to play unsupervised is a conscious decision. Parents are also not entirely rational. Don't underestimate the personal experiences of the parents either - I've seen multiple kids get kid by cars (and been hit by one myself) and also nearly drowned on multiple occasions so definitely pay a little extra attention when my kids are near a busy road or body of water. Obviously there is a spectrum though - it's possible to be a little more vigilant in some circumstances without being a "helicopter" parent.

I'm not sure that incorrectly assessing risk is limited to just parents either - look at our collective response to terrorism and mass shootings. I'm sure it's already been mentioned somewhere in these comments but the role of the media sensationalizing tragic but rare events is probably significant in this.
Always troublesome trying to balance art and commercial value in a discussion - film, music, whatever.

Want to see what disruption of a formerly 'high barrier' artistic industry looks like? Photography. I'm pretty sure the ubiquity of cameras and the assists and tricks and filters that are available now have had a significant impact on the income of professional photographers.

The last elephant in the room is that a large swath of people who attempt creative endeavors drastically over estimate their talent and under estimate the amount of work a polished product takes. Everybody has to start somewhere, sure. I've just noticed the modern mindset a little more expecting praise rather than understanding it needs to be earned sometimes and then crying about bullying when valid criticism comes rolling in (see: either Corey Feldman performance on the Today Show this year).
I ..... thought T-Mobile's policy was generally well known? Especially in the face of a few years ago, At&t hitting up folks for astronomical bills when iPhones were new, and folks were blasting past their data limits? I've had data with them since they were VoiceStream, and knew what each data plan offered.

Anyone who asked, I told them that T-Mobile's policy was WAY more consumer friendly than the other carriers, especially for someone who absolutely needs a data connection (and doesn't wander outside their relatively weak coverage)

What if the FCC mandated some kind of 'nutrition label' for ISP plans, that specified the technical points of their service offering? Spell out limits, min/max latency, best-effort/guaranteed, fair/shaped and what happens when limits are exceeded? Wouldn't be clearly in their realm of power to regulate how the these plans are marketed, rather than let the ISP's confuses folks with ambiguous language?
Do you track VAU not MAU?
Get out of parenthood by having a lot of sex and if the girl gets pregnant... well... her problem. Seems to me like they just wanted to have a movement. Their rights hvent been violated all through history, they just want to be able to be as bitchy as their female counterparts.
We have another system for outlier detection that can kill instances that start behaving badly in terms of CPU, response time, error rates, etc.

http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/07/tracking-down-villains-o...
Funny enough, I also went farming route: bought vineyards four years ago. I am curently thinking about getting into aeroponics herbs/lettuce production with all the automation.
I don't think thats actually true. Designers are mostly very good at not adding too much because it goes against their aesthetic mission.

What you are talking about is product people or product owners not designers.
Perhaps helicopter (extreme risk-averse) parenting is a rational reaction to the recent trend of having many fewer children much later in life.

For most of human evolutionary history, women had their first child in their teens. That means even if your child died, you would have many more chances to reproduce.

The average age of first child is now closer to 25. If a 10-year-old kid dies from an accident, the mother may have a lot of difficulty conceiving and bringing another child to term.

This might also explain why the author thinks moms are more likely to helicopter parent -- men's reproductive ability declines with age much more slowly than women.
> I don't understand why people are so thrilled to pay money to see a new movie when there are so many great movies in the past few decades

For me, it's HD. Old movies look... old.
Thanks. Glad to read that, but even 7.5 mil to the government seems like a conflict of interest.
How that story goes seem to be a cultural thing depending on the org culture. I've seen places where the loop goes:

1. BizDev and/or Sales identify a feature set that would enable a deal or broaden the market suitability.

2. Dev team tasked with adding feature XYZ.

3. Designer brought in to figure out how to add the feature to the UI with minimal effort.

4. Repeat.

I think this version is much more common in enterprise software and less so in mass consumer stuff. As we all know, enterprise software is unsexy and not worthy of YC/Startup culture. High touch sales also favors fewer deals with more customer leverage and really fat commissions for sales people.
> The term made into pop culture from parents who were physically showing up to college classes and arguing with lecturers on behalf of their children.

No, it came from a huge variety of behavior. I've never even heard of the above story before, but I certainly associate it with parents who got their kids into a good school by any means necessary, INCLUDING hand-shaping their children's social life and extracurriculars. I'd say babysitting your kids 24/7 definitely qualifies if the motivation is to control your child, as it almost always is.
Just a funny coincidence.
Random american of CZECH(oslovakian) descent commenting on HN :-))
Do the math: too much calculus? (2012)
Ah, I know we keep at least one spam email point open for people to register under (letthemeatspam.com), which is a Mailinator alias. If that still doesn't work, reach out to me at scott ~AT~ truejob.com and I'll get you sorted out.
Maybe, yeah. But is it neglect on the part of the developer (What are the consequences? You installed the app, no?), on the part of the parent not supervising (I'm kinda defending this position in this thread) or a reason to fix this with a generic law?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I really think that it's the parents' responsibility. And if ads are considered harmful in your household, don't use ad based apps / use an ad blocker? That should solve the problem on a local level.

Edit: It just came to my mind that ad supported apps are often/usually free.. Is that the case here? Because I seriously dislike the idea of blaming a developer of a free application for different ideas about morality or a bad choice ('copy/paste some ad integration code' - stupidity vs malice?) in implementing a way to make some money.
Russia and China can continue to push their space program with its costs simply because their societies are not geared around hand outs and pandering for the votes of those seeking hand outs.

Space is portrayed as having been there, done that. Worse, there are some trying to portray it as a rich man's place with the advent of space tourism and thus not a place government should be except to regulate it.

With regards to NASA, the shuttles, and such. Losing the shuttle was probably the best thing to happen to NASA long term. In the short term it wasn't and not because of the decision but because the management is so dysfunctional they don't know what they need. They have enough wants to fill a Sears Christmas catalog but none spark the imagination of the public and as such get little support.

They need a good spokesman, a long term goal, and some flashy steps that are achieved along the way to keep people interested and thereby keeping the funding alive. I would love to see a permanent moon settlement for more than just a few astronauts, more like a few dozen. Tie it in eventually with private trips to help keep it up and expanding...
The former is a conversation I--as a white male--would think you are, at best, skeevy, objectifying, and a little bit racist for having. Thinking that is not restricted to women at all. And you can be that kind of asshole anywhere you want to be. But you'll be considered in the context of the world you live in when you do. Why do you need a "safe space" where you can be shitty? Why not just don't be shitty?

The latter--I've used very similar phrasing in conversations with feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful, as per your first example. I think you're misunderstanding the objections that would be raised about your speech.
Too many have a terribly distorted view of "the feminist rulebook". Among them the idea that women are dead-set on monogamous, till-death-do-us-part relationships.

If you're into open relationships or poly or whatever you want to call it, you may be surprised to find that there is any number of women sharing your conviction. It's just rarely visible because it's not among the approved topics for light dinner conversation.

What usually doesn't work is to convince people of that idea. You can maybe bring it up and there's chance if they have never considered it before, but jealousy seems to be, from my experience, a rather fundamental emotion and while you can pressure some people into an open relationship, you're going to make them and yourself miserable. I've also seem men who convinced their girlfriends and ended up regretting it when they embraced it and got a lot more use out of it than their bfs.

Now if, for some reason, you expect to find a 20-year old beauty queen who'll stay at home and make breakfast for you when you come home and congratulate you on that night's conquest... That's not going to work, I'm sorry. I don't even get that idea, though. It's beyond me how you could enjoy the company of someone who apparently has no interests in life except baking and babies.
I understand that, but I don't understand at all why it's relevant to this article.
> Do usability studies and follow their results, like Microsoft used to do in 90s.

Isn't Ribbon UI based on such usability studies? Yet it's something that's constantly being criticized.

There must be more to it than just following the studies.
Wildlife Photographer of the Year Winners
I tend to think carefully about lifetimes, resource ownership and writing secure code. I am careful with threading, use language idioms to enforce safety and also use tools (such as valgrind, but also static analysis) to check the code.

This is not as reliable as Rust's compile-time safety checks, but in practice it works well enough for me.
I don't think this is typical for all C++ projects or programmers e.g. I am not particularly impressed by the (little) Firefox code I've seen.

I hope C++ continues to evolve safety features and get closer to Rust's guarantees. I don't think automotive or aviation will switch too soon.
"Comments" is clickbait in this instance.
Hate to deflate your errant assumption but I'm in Dallas.
No, I'm using an Airport. The entire connection was down, but it was more annoying since the kids could connect to wifi, but it wasn't able to get outbound.
The broad scientific consensus is that the deflation of the balls occurred naturally and there was no foul-play involved.

[0]http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/10/04/tom-brady-deflategate-ideal...

[1]http://www.wbur.org/onlyagame/2016/03/12/deflate-gate-scienc...

[2]https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/culture-beaker/deflategate-...

[3]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwxXsEltyas

[4]http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2016/05/27/scientists-file-a...
Peter Thiel Isn't Gay Because He Endorsed Donald Trump
Snapcash Binary SCAM
16X Improvement for HDFS Using Distributed NameNodes
No. Data caps (and bandwidth limits to some extent) are fundamentally broken.

My water company doesn't shut off my water because I took too many long showers this month. My gas company doesn't shut the valve because I had a few extra loads of laundry to run through the dryer. My electric company doesn't kill the lights because I was working on my car and used the 220V in the garage a lot this month.

Instead they install a meter at the inlet, charge me for exactly what I use (and when I use it!!!) and then they can plan their capacity based around their billings. If I need more inlets (too much current at the mains breaker, not enough gas or water pressure, etc.) then they charge me a fair price for the hardware and installation and bill that new inlet in the exact same way.

It's simple, transparent, and completely controllable by me. (If I don't want to rack up a larger bill this month I just close the inlet.)

---

Caps and overages are a very different model: they are charging me much more than the normal cost of service once I cross some threshold or cutting off my service. That'd be like my power company saying: "you've used more than the average 901kWH, so you're going to have to pay the industrial rate on the rest of your consumption this month."

More importantly, since private companies are running the show, we have no real insight into what average data consumption for the populace even looks like. You take it on their word that the plans they market align w/ the reality of average use. We can't verify that's the case because they don't legally have to publish it.

Essentially these companies could be telling you "640k ought to be enough for anybody", and you're arguing that it's perfectly reasonable for them to say anyone using >640k is the top 3% and should be billed at a premium. That's not the sort of thinking that pushes the state of the art forward, in fact it's actively harmful and disincentivizes upgrades to the network.

Their pricing model doesn't line up with the reality of a band-limited service, and they don't give us nearly enough information to verify their claims of what constitutes an "above average" consumer of data.

---

- Wireline service should be billed as a metered utility.

- Wireless service should have a fixed access fee to cover the cost of expanding the network (as well as providing E911, etc.) along with a variable access fee that is billed as a metered utility.

Anything else is borderline fraud, and I'm frankly sick of having to navigate the minefield of dishonesty that is consumer-grade ISP pricing schemes.
I want to know how he marketed that. I got plenty of shit I still remember that I could teach them for $5k. I'll give them a whole, damned CompSci education for $100k per set of students never leaving my house.
Clinton connection with intel contractor associated with Assange false accusations
>they sure do spend a lot of time talking about how crappy the bicycles are for the fish

Because it's extremely contrary to what 99.9% of men are brought up to believe. There are a lot of concepts that are difficult to learn, understand, and embrace. It's an experience that takes some men years to adopt. And there's a constant influx of men who are new to the concept and need help understanding it. It makes sense there would be a lot of discussion.
Excellent timing considering the HN thread [1] about T-Mobile being fined for network management.

"There is no doubt that the US will need to set up the infrastructure to keep pace with the rapid changes in usage and content expected in the future. Like any instance of supply and demand, we will continue to see a give and take in this market. As operators catch up to the current demand and LTE becomes faster, users will opt to use it over others – thus creating greater demand, supply scarcity, and decreased performance. At which point the cycle will begin again."

TL;DR Expect more network management in the future due to heavy demand of a constrained resource.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12745255
Just call it condescension, making it into a gendered term is bigotry. Tolerating the usage of that term is acknowledgement that bigotry towards men is acceptable.

The fact that you are a man is irrelevant, I'm also a man and I find the acceptance of bigotry towards men to be abhorrent.
Yeah, and burglary ends in a few minutes with the victim not even being there. Meanwhile, I have friends who now are having trouble sleeping just because of the mere idea of violation to their personal space.

I don't know what the author was thinking writing the above, but wow.
Unfortunately they don't separate out whether the drowning happened in a swimming pool or a bathtub.
“Abusing the NT Kernel Shim Engine” by Alex Ionescu at REcon 2016
Just because the user interface or functionality didn't change doesn't imply the internals didn't change to keep it maintained and running though, right?
SQLite Archiver for packaging assets
In my experience their customer service indeed refunded and paid return shipping on counterfeit products. I had to request a refund due to fake products 2-3 times over the many years I have been a happy customer there. No problem with Amazon's service with such issues, ever.

Counterfeits have been a problem on Amazon for several years. There was a time when only places like eBay or Rakuten had these issues. On Amazon you could just clearly see which products come directly from their warehouses and which you thus could trust 100%, and which from e.g. their Marketplace sellers (which has always involved a little risk). I am really puzzled when / why they decided to mix both worlds up, in visual disguise. Apparently at some point they have made the bad decision to become the Western Alibaba-like marketplace.

I had hoped that they, having some very intelligent employees, will eventually solve this issue; but I don't see this happening right now. In online shopping trust is extra important, and regarding the counterfeits they are gambling with their strong customer trust quite a bit.
Raising a kid is a project not a concept.

The second you understand that your whole approach to parenting changes drastically and you can finally start thinking about it rationally allowing your kids to build their own life with the support of their parents.
There are a lot of pink elephants, and more realistically, ridiculous rhetoric floating around. The trouble is, the candidates themselves are foaming at the mouth with this rhetoric. It's not just the campaign, just the party, but also the people you are voting for.

This makes it hard to see what the people really honestly believe, and what they are saying to rally their base, get out the vote, etc. It's a lot easier to motivate people to vote if you tell them they are going to die, or be slaves, whatever. The same logic goes for getting people to watch "action" news.

As for change, everyone wants change. No one thinks the system works for them if you ask them what they would change. Change is a powerful motivator, and works out for the challenger after two terms of the other party's president. You can blame anything on the current president, without having to do better, or even promise better. Just blame them, and sometimes make up an untenable plan to "fix" it (which experts will agree won't work for any number of real world reasons, which likely contributed to the outcome you're complaining about).

While everyone can get behind change, and it's a great rallying cry, the type of change is what really counts. You can't just say "change is good." This is the classic childhood fallacy of wanting what you don't/can't have. Sometimes change is not good, or not good in the short term.

I'm all for change. I'm just not sure what kind of change Trump would provide. Based on what he's saying, if I believe it, it's frightening. But it's probably mostly just made up nonsense.

Hillary will also change things. But again, who knows what? The rhetoric is equally as vague, but at least less frightening. But of course, what people do in office is completely different than the campaign.

As a side point, where does privilege come into this? It seems like some elephants actually exist, but certain people can't see them. Isn't that equally hallucinatory? Or is it just blindness? If you're any group that Trump is directly ranting about, I don't think you'd view it as a pink elephant. More like a person yelling and saying crazy things about you personally, without knowing you. But if it is something you can't understand, does it really not exist?
~250, because the average age of a CEO is 55 and it looks like the gender ratio (at least in the US and Canada) is about 50/50 at that age:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/d...
No, but you also shouldn't worry too much about making the constitution timeless. It doesn't bind us, it binds our government. It would be a healthier process for people to continually define the type of government they feels is appropriate to act for them than to accept some aged document as gospel.

And especially because the government spends much time working around the constitution with things like Interstate Commerce which now is everything. If you hold the work sacred you can't consider fixing the revealed flaws.

But yes, in practice it's almost always more practical to argue over the 2% rather than rewriting it all and rechartering the government.
The author showed his or her bias with this. There are lots of sexists and idiots on the internet talking about anything. It's fine if the author wanted to discuss systemic issues of sexism in MGTOW, but quoting a single douchebag like he somehow speaks for all men learning MGTOW is stupid.