skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is valid criticism, and then there's "this guy did not do anything after making a Nobel worthy discovery, should have been kicked out".

Also "haven't been cited particularly much" is utterly bullshit. Unless the goal is to optimize for mediocrity (3 papers each year with 20-50 citations each) being better than one break-through Nobel worthy work. Frankly citations are very very easy to game if you are a professor with reasonable means at a good university, and are a really really bad indicator of success.

Since he already had a very successful paper maybe he wanted to write risky papers. In any case that's not worse than other researchers who write cookie-cutter papers adding extra terms to equations that are guaranteed to be cited by the next guy adding even more terms. By finding these minor faults with a Nobel award winning researcher, you are displaying the same dysfunctional thinking that has plagued academia.
Just to clarify - his support wasn't public. It was a private donation, which was made public via journalists IIRC. As far as I know, he never publicly commented on the issue, at least before the firing.
Now your boss can buy back your unused vacation days
Finding primes is a P problem though, so I'd consider it a "solved problem". There's no equation that generates nothing but primes, is that what you meant?
My newsletter, Tedium (http://tedium.co), has slightly more than 3,000 subscribers, and produces a lot of content each week—between 3,000 and 4,000 words over two pieces. My strategy for building it out has essentially meant being willing to syndicate these articles far and wide. I currently work with three different outlets (Atlas Obscura, Motherboard, and Neatorama) to republish the work, all of which bring in new subscribers frequently. Eventually, Digg started picking up its articles as well. Basically, it gives me creative license to write whatever I want in my narrow niche while ensuring the newsletter goes out far and wide. I try to reuse every piece so nothing goes to waste.

While it's not bringing in tens of thousands of bucks, it's brought in enough to make it worthwhile (in part through affiliate links—my strategy is to link to the weirdest things on Amazon I can find, with the assumption people will eventually go back to buy something else).

I've also tried to find ways to minimize costs on my end, including switching email providers so that the financial impact of sending thousands of emails every month is small.
I think they meant there's no equation that generates nothing but primes.
Many SpaceX engineers helped him with the white paper he released. Steve Job's wasn't an engineer and he was fully capable of building a software/hardware company even after his engineer cofounder left.
I appreciate the interest. Thanks for the well-wishes!
-Listen a lot, you should aim listen and understand almost perfectly standard day to day conversations, before worry about being fluent,
You cant be fluent(and correct phonetically) if you didnt ear the word many times, (and by diferent people).
And you need to understand perfectlly, it means fast, if your brain is slowly thinking about how to speak, your mouth will be too,
So listen and understand well first.

-School might be good for the first basis, forget it soon (at least for easier languages).

-Find something interesting in this language, about your work, about your hobby, looking local series helps a lot, language+cultural.

-Be around people who dont speak your first language.
Ports style package manager using docker in 50 lines of ruby
And in all honesty, the whole "but child porn OMG" is a non-sequitor.

Child porn already exists on the web directly. And Tor Hidden Sites. And Freenet. And other places.

The real problem with CP is that fact there's no mens-rea requirement. A script can download it to your browser cache under blank images. It's in your cache, and you have no clue.

In the current situation, you are illegal. With mens-rea, you aren't - there was no willingness to get it, therefore you aren't at fault. Think of this as shoplifter compared to something that fell in your cart you missed. Same idea.

(In all honesty, I hold to Stallman's idea of CP shouldn't be illegal, period. It's a proof of a crime. Snuff videos of people being murdered isn't illegal, although the murdering part very much is. Child abuse is illegal, as well it should be, but proof of child abuse shouldn't.)
Suggesting a faster, most likely more cost effective alternative to a notoriously overpriced state project = subversion? If that's the case then subversion is a good thing we should encourage because there's a serious lack of it happening these days.
I don't think you can assume that the position will be filled. The position may be no longer be economically viable at higher wage rates or lower skill levels and thus be eliminated.

However, there are some additional factors that complicate this picture. If there are fewer unskilled jobs, people will adjust by working to become more skilled. If people have higher paying jobs they will spend more, producing more jobs. If there are many unskilled people looking for work, there is incentive for somebody to find a way to make use of that resource.

But really, the only point I sought to make here was that your original comment which didn't look at the non-skilled worker was missing a bit part of the equation, and so its logic didn't work.
At current prices, sending out physical letters isn't a cheap process. A dollar or two to handle stamps is only going to send out two to four letters, and that's before counting paper, envelopes, printing, and handling.
Campaign contributions are public. His contribution to Prop 8 was always public. You can access all campaign contributions above $100, it's just a matter of downloading a file.

Edit: the Supreme Court judged that political contributions are a form of political speech. That is the reasoning behind striking down limitations to contribute. [1]

If you downvote, care to explain if you think I'm reading these decisions wrong, or do you disagree with the Supreme Court?

[1]: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/03/us/politics/supreme-court-...
All of these are exactly the same in French though (apart from puenting). Now I wonder if they actually came from English in parallel or if some came by cross the Spanish/French border instead.
Assault on Wall Street
Hillary has some views and statements that I find reprehensible, but the contrast with Trump would make most of my complaints seem silly.
Whoops. In that case, I think they are referring to http://danluu.com/learning-to-program/
discussion on reddit.com/r/math if you are interested, highlighting various errors in the article: https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/57jfv7/5_simple_math_...
> Trump is the most dangerous candidate I've ever seen.

Five million dead in Iraq after George W. So what exactly are your predictions for Trump's presidency? Or a white American pussy is more valuable than a foreign brown life?

I don't like the guy but it's not a mass murderer yet.
You made a very specific claim in your first sentence, that supporting Trump constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty. Considering how quickly shareholder lawsuits follow announcements of mergers, I would expect lawyers to be circling these CEOs already. Please cite a single example of a CEO under threat of breaching fiduciary duty for supporting Trump.
Tor actually only uses exit nodes if you want to connect to the regular web, if you fetch a video from a .onion address the encryption is end-to-end. And there's also Freenet.

Github/Lab and HN actually seem pretty easy to decentralize - git already is, and the rest are essentially feeds, much like email/newsgroups/RSS/FMS. It's mostly a matter of running the aggregation code in the client, rather than on the server. Google can also be decentralized and federated - see YaCy. Amazon, there wouldn't be much point, since the service would still be contracted with a single party.

It's not a trivial job (in the "I could do that in a weekend"), but it doesn't seem architecturally hard considering the existing distributed platforms.
You are correct , and i indeed did not complete my thinking. If we can't avoid over-publishing, then at least publishing should be open and fast as long as it's technically correct. Personally i find high-IF journals to be a very bad 'filter' for science. Just publish the damn paper, as long as its methodologically correct, and let the entire community assess its significance, not just 3 overworked reviewers and an editor.

I think government officials don't have a direct interest in supporting the current inefficient publishing model, but it's a model that scientists themselves have accepted and reinforced since the 60s. If scientists put forward an alternative model that works better, i dont think governments or the wider public would object.
GSB-49:+Buyers+Be+Aware+-+Listen+Before+Buying+Your+Next+Gas+Station+Business
Well it seems already be a market for selling hardware without backdoors, unfortunately the price is not affordable for the majority of people. There was HN tread about this desktop system https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12711185
I think there's a risk of this becoming a payola or pay-to-play sort of situation. I don't know that you're wrong, but it makes the model seem more predatory of musicians.

Here's what I like about the very small flat fee:

1. It is small enough for even modestly successful musicians to cover it. It isn't a monetary barrier to entry.

2. It is likely large enough to prevent the shotgun approach. This is one of the bigger problems of finding new talent for record labels and music writers, especially in the digital age when emailing or messaging someone a link to your song approaches zero cost...you can't realistically listen to every unsolicited track, so you have to filter somehow. This, at least, insures you don't get a bunch of stuff in genres you don't care about or know anything about. People have to choose a little more carefully.

3. It provides an incentive for writers and musicians to form a relationship so they'll work together again (with the blogger getting tipped again and the artist getting more coverage or useful feedback); it starts out as a monetary transaction, but once they've connected up and like each other, they could work toward building a scene (and the network that comes with that). In music, a scene is a force multiplier for everyone involved (e.g., Seattle grunge, Madchester, Atlanta dirty south).

Increasing the fee for big sites looks more like payola than merely a filtering tool to determine who has gone to the trouble to figure out the best handful of writers or labels to reach out to. If the profit of the site begins to come from the musicians they're reviewing, their incentives start to get lopsided in the wrong direction. I'm not saying all bloggers would do it, but there would be incentive to boost stats (with clickbaity stuff), and to get as many submissions as possible. Incentives should, IMHO, be directed toward increasing quality, maximizing the time a writer can spend on the artists they choose to cover, and providing the best feedback for the artists.

Anything that gives incentive to cheat the system will break it and reduce the quality of the network...likely even killing it. If there's even a slight notion that people are scamming musicians with this, it will (maybe deservedly) die.
This is dishonest.
This is true[1], but especially for running Linux, I think this attitude might be shooting yourself in the foot. What I mean by that is, hardware support on Linux lags behind the closed source OS options by the very nature of Linux being open source and the developers needing access to the hardware to make anything work. Intel themselves try to get ahead of the curve, but even they are not perfect and when it comes to the trickier aspects such as power management, it often takes a few months of having the hardware in-the-wild to get things really sorted. And that's not to mention the fact that distros rarely run a bleeding edge kernel.

[1] Intel CPUs have not changed very much, instructions-per-clock wise, over the past 3 or 4 generations. You're looking at 5-10% at most for any single generation. Their GPUs have drastically improved, and the power efficiencies have improved, but since you're running Linux... well sadly, we don't tend to get the same benefits closed source peoples do in those two respects. As for SSDs, buy something with a HDD and install the SSD yourself. It's cheaper, and you'll get a far better SSD than you would when you let the OEM choose what to install.
That press release is from "December 2015". He's clarified this position after the backlash and impracticality of such a plan since then on a number of occasions. He now only apparently plans to block a few muslim-majority countries where terrorism is a problem (such as in Syria as the OP mentioned), instead of all muslims. This came up in the first debate. Although I'm not sure the executive branch even has this power.

This is one of the few things he's actually been somewhat specific about. His approach to legal immigration is still not clear.
Pentagon Video Warns of Unavoidable Dystopian Future for World’s Biggest Cities
I work for a small nonprofit that publishes a newsletter, and it's been very hard to convince people to subscribe. We're trying to think beyond email, and more mobile. Then again ours is free. I wish you the best of luck.
No, it cannot. Trespass is illegal. Trespassing because you want to speak on the property is still illegal.
Show HN: Gerph – A simple and blazing fast key-value configuration store API
In counterpoint to this, witness the mass protests (by women) against the proposed ban in abortion. A religious right wing pressure group pushed it along, the govt backed it, mass protests, humiliating back down. Goes to show how out if touch ruling parties are about what people think, and their belief that people actually do support their hard line policies.

In actuality, maybe people are just voting based in whether their economic circumstances improved over the last term, regardless of whether the change was due to national or global factors. Maybe they just don't like the Russians and voted for the nationalist rhetoric.
The fact that these arguments always seem to require one said to make up crazy nonsense is pretty telling. He advocates nothing of the sort.
I just played it. Thats a really cool twist on the clasic. It reminds me of the old 90s 3D tris PC game..
Allenamento+schiena:+ecco+come+allenarla+efficacemente
This is dishonest. Share with the community how Thiel's capital enabled PG's buyout.
I think that YC, in its official capacity, should disavow Thiel. I think it's morally incoherent for YC partners to declare Trump a national emergency and a threat to the republic while continuing to do business with one of his greatest backers, and not acknowledging the conflict.

For whatever reason, YC has chosen to stay silent while one of its partners pours resources into a candidacy outside the bounds of normal political discourse in the US. This silence is very weird, especially considering the individual partners' alarmist comments about Trump.

I don't think YC became poisoned with Thiel's views the moment he expressed them. They were poisoned by his views when they chose not to react in any way, and maintain their silence. I wonder what women, Muslims, veterans, etc. in this thread feel about the matter.

To the point that Thiel doesn't completely endorse his candidate, I believe that argument is substantially weakened by his 1.25M donation coming after multiple accusations of sexual assault. Clearly Thiel is comfy enough in his support to disregard this, and the parade of horrors that preceded it.

I accept that I may be starting to sound a bit nasty. I consider what is happening a display of spinelessness, and the arguments being marshaled in its defense disingenuous. It makes me angry.
Learn with your kinds/SO. Let's be honest, a lot of your time with them is spent watching TV or something like that anyway. Turn it off and read together.
To give another example:

If the US were to outlaw all forms of encryption, we would have less privacy AND less security:

Less Privacy: all communication is now readable by a third party in the middle

Less Security: all banking information is now transmitted in plaintext
At the end of the week, I look back at the hours/tasks I have allocated to me and I fill them in. Generally, there's no link between how long something took me and how many hours I write in it; I just write all the hours in. If there were 8 hours set aside for it, I write 8 hours in the box. Sometimes I spread it over several days.

If I don't have enough tasks/hours allocated, I look back at anything I did during the week that isn't on the allocated list, and I have it added to the allocated list and then I write the hours in. Sometimes, I'll do this during the week rather than all on Friday.

The purpose is to fill in the boxes and make the numbers match. Nobody ever examines the boxes and numbers, and they bear no relationship to what actually happens. If I don't fill in the boxes and make the numbers match, someone comes to insist that I fill in the boxes and make the numbers match.

In the ones that I get added, I pick the number. Other ones just appear with numbers already in them. Sometimes I like to spread the numbers out. Sometimes I just do them in big blocks.
How HR Can Shape a CX Focused Workforce
Authorization typically means what actions the authenticated user is allowed to perform, not that the authenticated user has herself conveyed some kind of approval.
EDIT: This comment has substantial problems, though I think the conclusion is still essentially correct; see discussion below

Because that's liberalism. Separating concerns like this is the sort of thing that is fundamental to a liberal society.

Trump is a serious problem. He is fundamentally illiberal. But what sort of victory is it if we defeat Trump and give up on liberalism anyway? Yeah, that whole Enlightenment project, let's just toss that right out, because we need to do so to preserve the Enlightenment. Destroying the village is a wonderful way of saving it. Instead of rule by reactionary tyrants who determine what you can and can't say, we'll have rule by leftist tyrants who determine what you can and can't say! Such an improvement.

It does us no good to become the enemy in order to defeat it. And, what, are we to believe that this transformation is temporary? That oh sure maybe we'll fight dirty this time, but next time and in all the future times it will all be OK, liberal society will just come right back? No way. It is so much easier to destroy than to create. This sort of viciousness, of splitting everything into "us" and "them" and demanding that the "us" be in absolute control of everything... that's natural. That's human nature. To get people of different groups to live together without immediately going for each other's throats, to build the structures that allow that to occur, that takes work. We start down that road, we brush those supports aside, we're not coming back anytime soon.

And again -- the Trumpers are very, very, wrong, but if we use dirty tricks to go after them, all they'll see is that we're using dirty tricks to go after them. It's a mistake to think that our behavior doesn't influence theirs. If we break the "no firing people for political reasons" rule, then so will they. The eventual endpoint of all this is a split society where Democrats can only buy from Democrats and Republicans can only buy from Republicans... or maybe it's another 30-years war. I think "don't start another 30-years war" is a good rule. (Which is another reason not to vote Trump, because he'll try to go after the Muslims and the Mexicans, and then... but you know that already.)

In short, defeating Trump is important, but that's only part of what it's going to take to prevent a descent into illiberalism.

( Or maybe I'd be better off just linking to Scott Alexander: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-co... )

EDIT: Rereading, the final link is not actually appropriate in this case, given how much of a threat Donald Trump actually is. That said, I think my position is still basically correct due to the reasons I give in the grandchild comment.
Interesting take on the concept. Do you have any experience with this? Know where I can read more about this sort of thing? :)
All good areas of inquiry. You call for a stronger chain of reasoning connecting the free online courses to federal funding. I'll start by setting myself back a bit: I don't think Harvard and MIT receive federal funding earmarked for educational services, only research. We can toss in a caveat characterizing federal student loans as funding, but it doesn't change the central issue: no federal funds are explicitly earmarked for free online courses. All that said, it isn't obvious why this should be an issue; the above classification function is significantly weaker than that used in real life, and federal funding binding an entire organization avoids the hairy problems that come with tracking what money goes where in fungible currency. Organizations know the strings attached to federal dollars before choosing to accept them. So yes, receiving federal funding for programs A, B, and C require programs X, Y, and Z to fall under federal purview and penalty.

You raise a possible distinction between free online courses, which you reduce to releasing information, and services. This might be delving into semantic argument territory. I would say the onus is on you here to argue why free online courses should not be considered a service offered by the university and thus possibly not subject to accessibility requirements.
>There is a difference between firing an employee and continuing to do business with someone that funnels millions of dollars into a racist, sexist, sexual predator that's backed by a foreign intelligence service.

Doesn't having to base your argument on lies like this undermine it?
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...
When you use pthread semaphores, be careful reading the documentation, because there are some gotchas that are not immediately obvious. I think that's why more programmers don't use them, because at first they seem intimidating.
> "That link would be appreciated."

Sure, no problem.

http://youtu.be/VADcWANqBp8
That's why I posted the links to the pdfs! :-)
"... is a criminal offence in England."

No, it's not, it's not a criminal offence anywhere in the Western world for security guards to do such a thing.

I read the article - I didn't miss those quotes.

I think you are missing something important:

* charges laid *

Meaning that there are legal charges against those two - indicating they had possibly done something illegal.

While I agree it's 'confusing' that one of the library staff, for whom the security guard may have ostensibly been working - implored the guard to 'not kick the man out' - I don't this resolves the question.

"as part of the agreement nobody was to be prevented from asking a controversial question and the security team would consult with library officials before ejecting any nonviolent patrons"

I get that - but was the guard acting on his own here?

It remains unclear to me - which is my point.

If this security guard was acting entirely on his own initiative, and just kicking a guy out for asking 'controversial' (and let's be fair: insulting and stupid) questions, then yes - there's obviously something crazy going on. Why were they ejected?

But I'm not sure it's clear from the article, which is my point.

"Ask me to leave [and] I will leave.” - obviously someone was asking him to leave.

I think the writer did a poor job of articulating the situation.
Then the article should be mostly about how he built the music blog, rather than eliding over that in a sentence.