skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While I think it will overall be bad for the UK, on the specific point of researchers in shared EU projects, that is a bit less tied to EU membership. The EU research programme doesn't require EU membership to join, or even quasi-membership of the EFTA/EEA variety. In fact Turkey recently joined it (in 2014). It does still require mutual agreement that may or may not happen, but I think a specific "a la carte" agreement on a programme like this one is less thorny than most other questions, since it isn't really tied with anything else (like common markets or immigration or anything else), except for agreeing to pay the membership dues.
Also because it is better.

"In converting Pinners’ profiles to React, we’ve seen consistent performance and engagement improvements. Performance and engagement metrics each have increased 20 percent."
preliminary research suggest 50% of people is dumber than average.
My point is: If a "remain" vote is not on the table, then what's the point in voting? It seems like a pointless exercise.

Parliament can be (and are) involved in the Brexit process, but there are plenty of other ways to do that than with this vote.
There’s a good chance that one or more of these resonated with you.

And that’s okay; it doesn’t mean that you’re going to fail in business

Yes it does, and you deserve it so that someone more capable can come along. </rant>
What do you use instead of org mode?
The mandate is as strong as mandates ever are in a democracy. But the cost of ignoring it is political, not legal.
Because the alternative is a complete rewrite, which is usually very costly.
This alien concept (to many engineers) of beauty is a large part of makes new apps, especially web applications and SaaS startups, win or lose. Good design elements are the norm now, and expected. Gone are the days where someone would accept an ugly piece of solid software as a MVP. If it doesn't visually look as good as others in the ecosystem, your application is toast no matter how good it is otherwise.
So a few things:

1) an early election would require 75% majority vote in the commons. Unlikely as labour would be wiped out (they'd have to vote for it).

2) The Tories are utterly scared of UKIP, an early vote if the economy is in less than great health, or the effects of post brexit globalisation become clear, then UKIP will hold the balance of power.

3) The real power in the tory party it's self is not with May and the government its with the 1922 comittee, who are an odd mix of libertarians and ultra nationalistic types. It would be them driving the purge not May. That scares May.
This is simply not true. Where have you got these ideas from?
The company's mission is to fulfil its purpose that may or may not related to immediate shareholder value. I recommend to read the Flow's author's other book called Good Business: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Good-Business-Leadership-Making-Mea... . He describes quite well what bugged me with the concept of “a business entity is to maximise the profit”.
> Why doesn't Linux track actual hardware proved to be compatible.

Sure it does [1].
The "bit of research" involves finding out if your desired machine has one of the many chips known to work flawlessly, which shouldn't be a problem, unless you don't mind what you spend your money on and just buy impulsively.

There are also chipset manufactures which are known to be more friendly than others, for example almost any modern Intel Wireless chip will work just fine.

Even for generally unfriendly OEMs, you can find amazingly clear documentation [2].

> Oh, wait, Linux does not

Again, you just asserted stuff without any evidence, see above.

> because it isn't a Product

Not sure by what definition of "product" you're going by, (if any), but you can absolutely get commercial support from a number of companies i.e. Canonical, RedHat, SuSE and even Oracle if you so desire.

[1] - https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/WirelessCardsSupp...
[2] - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/broadcom_wireless
Many people voted pro-Brexit in the referendum due to the increasing disparity and alienation between the ruling/political class and the rest of the country.

By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen. That's a sound result for the politicians and chiefs of industry based in London, but what will it mean for the wider UK?

Both the courts and parliament demonstrating they are ready to meddle and overrule the majority will of the people, I have a feeling we are going to see many, many more votes for UKIP and BNP in any subsequent election. It's a ratchet effect along the lines of "if they didn't get the message with this vote, perhaps they'll get the message with this one."

For the Americans out there, this is akin to Trump receiving a 52% majority by US voters (yes, 52% is still a majority, no matter how thin), and then the Electoral College deciding to vote amongst themselves instead about who becomes President: of course it would be Clinton.
I closed mine when it was apparent recruiters were illiterate and couldn't read "Contracts only".
Abstaining is less politically embarrassing than voting no confidence in yourself. You can guarantee that at least some of the opposition MPs will vote no confidence in your government, and it's not really politically possible for them to vote in favour of your government.
Ask HN: When to go “Serverless”?
I always read about this new AWS Lambda stuff and how it scales effordlessly etc.

Some people say it saves them money, because they just have to pay "on demand"

Some people say it is too expensive, because the "on demand" costs per requests are exorbitant higher than a request would cost on a dedicated machine.

What are good scenarios to go "serverless"?
This is not about rejection and going on about the process. Yes, it is somewhat a numbers game, but what leads to rejection?

For a person of color to even get to the interview process, you have to be lucky. Now that you have a PoC in the room with other people, thay same PoC has to prove beyond their subconcious biases and prejudices that they are indeed, better than anybody else in the world for that job, including the interviewers. BUT at the same time, that PoC has to deal with the bias and not be too good, lest they offend the people conducting the interview, and not get offended by the blatant racist, misogynist, xenophobic comments that are going to show up in that interview.

Some examples? "Do you know ho to read email?". "So you are an expert, and you proved solving all these technical problems and your resume, but how exactly can you prove that you are an expert?". "You have an accent". "Our clients want someody more like them, white". "You are too exotic for our group".

Yes, all of those have happened.
Because not every state is like that. I live in Pennsylvania. I don't even know what the ballot issues will be. Hell, I don't even know who is running locally.

I also can't vote by mail just because I want to. I have to be out of town on official business to "qualify" for a mail in ballot. Being on vacation isn't even an apparently accepted reason (on mobile but I'll get a link)

Edit: Link to PA absentee ballot application: http://www.dosimages.pa.gov/pdf/AbsenteeBallotApplication.pd...

Relevant parts:

Section A: I declare that I am eligible to vote absentee at the forthcoming primary or election since I expect that my duties, occupation or
business will require me to be absent from the municipality of my residence on the day of the primary or election for the reason stated
below; and that all of the information which I have listed on this absentee ballot application is true and correct.

Section B: I declare that I am eligible to vote absentee at the forthcoming primary or election due to the illness or physical disability stated
below; that the information required to be listed pertaining to my attending physician is correctly stated herein and that all other
information that I have listed on this absentee ballot application is true and correct.
If the EU was in any way serious about continuing to collaborate with the UK after the vote, they'd be willing to start talks now, pre-notification, as the guy who wrote Article 50 has said it was deliberately designed to never be used. It's not a workable mechanism for leaving.

In fact they are acting as if the vote never happened and refusing to talk about anything at all until notification, thus doing their utmost to ensure the 2 years elapse with nothing done.

They're also briefing about "dirty brexit". Google it.
Isn't the general stance still pro-brexit? If anything, this period has made brexit more acceptable to the eyes of everyone (it used to be taboo).
Getting Things Done with Kanban
I've done similar things using Scala, which has good parser combinator support and interoperates very nicely with a Java stack.
Truth has stopped beeing the tamed animal that the news-manufacturer knew it to be. You told it what to be, and it jumped through the hoop and became half-reality by the masses believing.

What your hear is the whining for power decentralized away. And those calling for censorship, demand to reinstate it, so they can have it.
Those not debunking fake news, but declaring unproofable conspirarcys at work, want to shirk the work or have something to win, when the truth is not found out.
There are also remain voters who wish they'd voted leave.
IoT Prototype in 15 minutes
Well, for one, the EU has (understandably) choosen very anti-Brexit negotiators, hinting at hard and unfruitful negotiations. I guess the UK would have loved if the EU sent Faragne...
> The vast majority of the British voters do not like the EU.

That's a wild overstatement - 52% of the people who voted (which was about 40% of the eligible voters) voted to leave the EU, sure, but that's not nearly "the vast majority of British voters" by a long margin.

> Farage will return to UKIP and UKIP will absolutely slaughter the other parties

I would put money on this never happening.
Turn images into online slideshows
Lego 2016: What’s Up in the Lego World (5 Things)
We were talking about security...

But yes, it's almost like DCs were built with this in mind. Wh would've guessed...
> By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen.

By what logic?? Most reports says otherwise.
I tried to quit with gum and it's just not a good replacement. It tastes foul, made my mouth and throat feel unpleasant, and does nothing for the "habit" part of the addiction. Vaping worked much better for me.
tax dollars, down the drain, was the logo worth that much to change? they need to be more nimble and thrifty
Mad props for extending the analogy to make our point. Nice job!

Now I need to find language to complement someone without it sounding like OO programming style.

HN, may I please have a simple +1 or upvote button? Needs to be usable on my smallish screen too.
"By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen."

That's hugely uncertain.
Tech is hip, trendy and a desirable sector now - unlike, say, logging or mining. Some people feel like they are not only owed a seat at the table, but that there was a grand conspiracy in keeping them out of a field that not long ago only a certain group of people was interested in.
I've wondered about this too. I think ORMs serve effectively the same purpose as Javascript transpilers (which gives you 1 & 2)

You can also write stored procedures in Postgres in other languages.
+no responsibility +unlimited holidays +no office politics
However in comparison to the American election, where Trump has been explicitly clear in his plans and prejudices.

A number of voters opting for Leave did so based on information provided by the Leave campaign, a lot of which turned out to be very misleading or just plain false.

Edit: And so it's not unreasonable to think that a portion of Leave voters may have already changed their minds in the wake of what has transpired.
The article is not about voting on a cell phone. It's about sending text messages to people to try to convince them to go vote.

The key takeaway is probably that they think the cost might come in at $8 per voter, compared to $20 for more traditional methods of voter encouragement.
Very grateful for the depth of your answer, thank you ...
The main rallying cry was:

o there are no down sides to leaving

o Leaving would give us 350 million pounds extra a week to improve healthcare

o We would have a strong currency

o The world would fall over it's self to give "free trade deals" to the UK

o UK tourists would be able to go to the EU without a visa

o No businesses would leave the UK to avoid trade tarrifs/customs hops

o The UK wouldn't loose service "passport rights" that allow banks, IT companies and service providers to provide services to the continent without extra taxes or hurdles

o that more good and secure jobs would be created, and globalisation would be rolled back
This suggests that brexit is still supported (can't judge quality):

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/696760/british-no-reg...
The effective ways to enhance customer experience
The government has already set out how they want Brexit to work. I haven't heard Labour or other parties set out how they want Brexit to work, except the Lib Dems who don't want Brexit to happen at all.

If the only plan for Brexit out there is the one the government has, then of course that's the one that is going to be implemented. Parliament does have the opportunity to influence that plan, though.
There are no soft brexit options. Anyone who thinks this hasn't been paying attention and isn't aware of the facts (ironic, considering how often such people accuse others of not knowing the facts).

No such offers are on the table anymore, not even to Switzerland, which has been told by the EU that there will never be any more negotiations unless they agree to replacing their current arrangements with a new one that's basically EU membership by another name. Additionally the Swiss also voted to impose immigration quotas years ago and the deadline for that referendum (a legally binding one) is February. The EU have told them to vote again. The Swiss Parliament is now desperately pretending that a law change that doesn't involve quotas is sufficient to satisfy a referendum that specifically asked the population about implementing quotas.

Even Switzerland is no longer able to get a Switzerland style agreement. The chances of the UK getting one are zero.

The UK has to accept that the EU is now an enemy of the country and is fully committed to the impoverishment and exclusion of the British people. There won't be any cooperation on anything with the EU ever again, and not because the UK doesn't want it but because the EU is held together by fear.
It's such a knee jerk reaction by now: anyone who replaces a part of their system with another technology must be doing it for stupid reasons.

Especially if the new thing is React...
My take on this is that it was a "qualified" majority to "Leave" but no specific plan was outlined as to what "Leave" entailed. "Remain" is easy: Status quo. "Leave" means many different things to many people.

In a constitutional republic (such as Ireland for instance) a referendum clearly specifies the change to the constitution down to the wording and an open informed debate is had on what the consequences, and possibilities of those unforeseen etc.

There was nothing like this with "Leave". Article 50 as a the mechanism by which leave might be initiated was never even mentioned.

Even since the vote there has been all sorts of inferences based on opinion polls about what the "Leave" constituency desire and it has largely been interpreted as "keep the foreigners out" - and that is an interpretation that clearly has no constitutional footing.

Brexit was at best a plebiscite, dressed up as a referendum. There is a mandate for leaving the EU, but there is no prerogative at all for any of the specifics of how that happens nor has there been a robust discussion over what "Leave" even means.

It will be sad to see the UK go and it will be disruptive for many but if that is her will then so be it, but I wouldn't want it to happen before all that are involved get to have their say on what it means.
Kind of surprised that only 72.2% turned out, given the implications of the vote. When Quebec was voting for sovereignty in 1995, 93.52% of the eligible voters in the province voted. When Scotland voted for the same recently, it was around 85%.

In any case though, if people don't want to show up, then why force them? I'd put the 'blame' on the campaigners for not underlining the importance to get out to vote to constituents.
I used spacemacs for a while just so I could use Org mode. But I just couldn't adapt to it. I love Vim in the console, and the Spacemacs experience is just different enough that it didn't gel with how I work.
It's pretty clear that if they revoted the result of the referendum would be anti-Brexit so UK is in the absurd situation where they have to proceed with a major political/economic decision that does not reflect anymore the will of UK's citizens.
> By deferring the decision to a parliamentary majority, the High court has ensured that Brexit will not happen

There's nothing sure about this. In general most MPs are against Brexit but they are expected to roughly follow the will of the people, so there's a good change they'll still vote in favour of article 50. I mean the whole government right now is working hard to make Brexit happen, while at the same time being against it.
> The vast majority of the British voters do not like the EU.

The vast majority of voters in any country do not like the government. That's not the benchmark for democracy.

> about half were motivated by simple fear of economic consequences like higher prices rather than any actual support for the project.

Economic consequences are just as real as "sovereignty" and similar concerns, if anything more so.
Steve Jobs, aka the visionary genius, everyone.
> The vast majority of the British voters do not like the EU. Most voted out

Although your comment is clearly articulated, and concludes with a very real and accurate statement, I feel I must redress the opening of your second paragraph.

If the vast majority of 'voters' did not like the EU, and 'most voted out' then the result would have been the same, but with much larger majority. This was not the case. The economic fallout of Brexit has yet to be experienced as it will not really kick in until after the UK leaves the EU. The fallout size also depends on the 'deal' (if any) the UK gets when it leaves. Merkel has been very clear that there is no deal on the table and there never will be. Whether the threat of higher prices were a scare tactic or not, many remainers simply did not want a financial hit on their wallet, which is totally understandable. Meanwhile, a large swathe of Leavers simply voted that way because Farage told them it was the only way to keep the migrants out.

At the end of the day, both sides were lied to, more or less, by parties whose political agendas and parliamentary jockyings were more important than the well-being of the country.

I'm not pro the EU in it's current form, but I do believe that the UK will be worse off as a non-member. This is my view, and I voted accordingly.

I also voted in an well-informed away, and I just wish the rest of the country had done so also. The outcome might have still been the same, but at least it would have been for the right reasons.
You can probably access a sample ballot (a quick search has PA counties doing that). That takes care of the information difference.
How do you ever get past the first 2-3 months? I've tried multiple times to make it a habit, and generally lose the will to do it 6-12 weeks in.
That's just how democracies work

Not really, no. Especially if it's not clear there's an option to say "idk". Say you care very much but don't know what's best? Does your vote not matter, now? If so, doesn't that make the election wrong? But how do you express that?

There may be an answer to this deep inside some legislature chapter XVI section 16 paragraph b, but if people don't know, does that matter?

Anyway, not saying that was the case for brexit. But "That's just how X works" is typically not the strongest argument. There are a hundred ways to implement a democracy, and they all have their own flaws.
Got 1 minute to comment on quality of our domain name suggestions?
You didn't quote turnover figures, you quoted average time on the job.
HPE OpenSwitch project overtaken by SnapRoute
Can A.I. Help Trump and Clinton Supporters Get Along?
If companies can have “culture”, they can have personality and morale / ethics as well.
>even when not respecting a democratic vote

The "Brexit" vote was nothing more than an opinion poll. There is no direct democracy in the UK.
> they'd be willing to start talks now, pre-notification

And fuel every little fascist's antieuropean campaign in other EU countries? The EU has to make an example about how leaving the Union is a bad idea, one that even the dumbest of voters understand - and that's exactly what they are going to do.

> In fact they are acting as if the vote never happened

Which is partly due to the fact that the British Referendum vote has no legal standing whatsoever. It is a "Suggestion".

> and refusing to talk about anything at all

Thus avoiding to making concessions and letting the UK test the waters before they actually decide to jump in.

> thus doing their utmost to ensure the 2 years elapse with nothing done

You do understand that the two years are a maximum length, and that the EU could simply decide not to Play, declaring negotiations over within seconds of May pulling the trigger, thus creating the hardest of Brexits with the UK without the EU and without any newly-set up trade agreements with third parties?
Why Local Citations Are Important to the Success of Your Local Business
Sounds like a bad leadership style. A manager should encourage a healthy work-life balance, otherwise they may find very high turnover.
>> people on various parts of the political spectrum are writing things about various Middle Eastern actors which they are sure to regret in future.

Interesting, what do you think will be heavily reevaluated? Frankly, I have no clue. The whole place seem too complex to have a serious opinion.

Do you expect that ~ friends of different democratic groups will do genocides? [Edit: It ought to be quite a time before a US president flirts with the Brotherhood in Egypt again, right?]

Do you think the acceptance of extremists will be embarrassing? When the whole "don't be a friend of a non believer" etc gets through to the left?

Or the opposite, that the Middle East will be less intolerant and easier to live with and gets modernized?
> I can't believe the UK government allowed this to happen.

Blame David Cameron for that, the referendum was supposed to be an intra-party political play in which he expected "remain" to prevail to quell the extreme wing of his party. It's like a US president, without any form of planning, calling for a referendum on federal minimum income(D) or banning Muslims(R) with the intention that they turn to the further-from-center wings of their respective party and say "See, Americans don't really want that", and then things don't go as planned, but the country will have to lay in the bed that was made while the prime minister literally[1] whistles his away from the public stage...

Not even Farage had a plan, despite having been the face and voice of the anti-EU sentiment. As soon as Brexit won, he resigned and went underground. You would expect he would roll his sleeves and dive in to implement the plan he has honed over the years.

1. Cameron hummed/whistled a tune as he walked away from the podium at the end of his last address to the nation.
Other way round: the single market is extremely critical to the UK econonmy, as we've been seeing.