skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not convinced he really wants to do the things you list.

We will all find out in time, but as I watched him sit with Obama yesterday and also with Paul Ryan, both of whom looked like seasoned politicians who knew what was expected of them, I saw in Trump a man who looked lost and uncertain.

I suspect that he liked the idea of being president more than he will enjoy doing the job.
Once all the candidates came out against it, it became clear it was not going anywhere anytime soon. So why bother posting about something that is not going to happen.

I don't think identity politics had anything to do with it. Bernie Sanders was against the TPP as much as Trump was, for many of the same reasons.
The exact order does not really matter. Some people prefer top down approach, others want to start from the bottom, then gradually abstract the details. My point is, you need to know how to work at each of these abstraction levels.

I did mention a course on algorithms and data structures as a requirement, that's where you learn about complexity, graphs, and other things.

I'm guessing you don't know what Kaggle is. It's not a silly competition. It's a place where you get exposed to real-world problems, using real-world data. This is a good alternative to an actual internship as a ML/Data engineer.

You expect ML engineers to know how modify the Linux kernel? Do you also want them to know how to design a superscalar processor in Verilog? How about simulating circuits with SPICE? I don't think so.
Why Democracy is difficult:

There is a politician
Who says they believe in an ideology
Which tends to favor an idea
Which may result in them voting for a policy/law
Which leads to an implementation
Which needs to be enforced
Which is finally very difficult to measure ( because there is no 'control' country that is identical save for this particular law.)

And that is like the best case scenario without the analytically impenetrable layers of bureaucracy and politics which can derail and subvert the process.
> will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can.

This is the statement that upon rereading his email, troubles me the most.

The rest of it with the Principal of Charity could be taken more favourably.

In the context he can only mean shielding 'his community' from Trump supporters. What other 'movement' could he be talking about?

So it follows that his community does not contain Trump supporters. That's the presumption.

I started to defend him in an earlier thread, but now I wished I had not after I parsed that line properly.

I'm ashamed to see a fellow Irishman being so blockheaded.
Subsidies for international corps.
This is an argument that Trump has been making for decades. He believes US is getting the short end of these deals because he sees the US almost as mob guys providing protection but forgetting to collect protection money. He sees the US as spending money protecting Japan, S. Korea, and Europe without getting proper return. I believe we've been getting peace and favorable trade deals in return. He thinks that isn't enough and that it's time to collect.

The same thinking has him arguing that we should get the oil fields after the Iraq war.

I don't agree with this reasoning but we're about to see this play out.

Edit: here's a video that I linked to in my other comments. It's an Opera interview from 1988 where Trump says Japan is "beating the hell out of this country" and "they aren't paying" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI

This has been the most consistent part of Trump's platform. America is getting the short end of the deal.

Again, I'm not a Trump supporter but this policy is what Trump genuinely believes and will likely pursue.
Ask HN: What are good resources for studying Dynamic Programming?
Hi there,

I am looking for resources to study dynamic programming, not only theoretical ones, but very practical and example-oriented ones are good as well, actually much better than pure theory.

My focus is to be able to solve algorithmic challenges in contexts such as: competitive programming and coding interviews.

Cheers and thanks for recommending stuff.

----------

EDIT: typos.
The issue with the TPP is that it put the interests of international conglomerates above the ability of sovereign nations to decide what happens within their borders (ie an energy company could sue a small country for increasing the gas tax). While free trade is almost universally desirable, it must be balanced against the concentration of power that inevitably accumulates from unfettered capitalism.
That's not completely fair. I have always been for the TPP and still am. I have not changed my position.

The EFF stance wasn't rational, standardizing IP laws with trade partners was actually a good thing for innovation IMO. I understand their aversion to it, but disagree.

I'm pretty sad that this trade deal has died. It is scary that we're giving up free trade for protectionism, which will actually hurt those people that were hurt by the existing trade deals a great deal more.
Not that I'm aware of. I watched Occupy Wall Street for a while and it fragmented into a million subgroups without a leader. It seems you really need a Gandhi or MLK type to keep movements on track.
Talk about Facebook Live. Now Facebook Dead. Product innovation at FB is crazy good
I agree with this statement as well. I would suggest though, that it's being strawman'ed. Let's "steelman" the argument just as we try to do here on HN. For example, this statement is a strawman: "Trump said that a judge is inherently biased just because his parents are Mexican." The steelman would be something like, "Trump claimed that a judge had a conflict of interest against him. The judge was born in America, but has Mexican parents, which Trump believes could cause him to have a bias due to Trump's anti-Mexican policy proposals, such as the border wall."

Should he be calling the judge's ability to do his job into question? I don't think so, no. But let's argue against what he actually said - in fact, go even further than that and interpret it in the most reasonable way possible - because it's more likely to result in useful discussion among people of differing opinions.
My guess is that we've been approaching this from a moral standpoint (human rights, freedom of speech, etc) but those arguments have never budged China.

If you are ignorant on the subject, why not learn before randomly speculating?

I have only read moderately on the subject of China but I am certain the Chinese are aware of the argument that free speech offers economic benefits and many people have made that argument in fact. The Chinese government isn't interested in moral appeals but it is unlikely they're engaging these policies just to spite us for being moralistic. There's no reason to drop a moral approach since does put some pressure on China's image in the world. The Chinese have explicitly decided that security trumps economic opportunity and moreover they've learned that security can protect the interests of Chinese Internet firms.
1. Something (paperwork like letters and invoices) in my daily routine was taking more time than necessary and the result was not good enough. I wanted a better system.

2. The need to make dealing with my paperwork as painless as possible.

3. LaTeX, Pandoc and a makefile.

4. http://mrzool.cc/tex-boilerplates
Distinct possibility those countries will dislike us less though. Currently we're like their overprotective (attack) helicopter parents. I am a little bit less worried about the major powers as I am the less predictable ones like North Korea.
From reading it, looks like it's the same concept.

Thanks. Didn't know about it.
Sounds like YC is building their own wall
Peter Thiel Joins Trump Transition Team
Great point.

Racist and misogynist are very heavy terms, and once they are in the mix, there is no way a moderate is going to go near the discussion. It is like "you are racist, racists shouldn't be listened to, I will not listen to you".

There have been so many comments like this in this thread - even when the original comment is pointing this out. Sigh.

Its so great to learn something I did not think of during a discussion like this. Its exactly what its for.
Are you unaware that Trump wants to increase military spending?:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/06/politics/donald-trump-defense-...
I support free trade, but I am strongly opposed to TPP. In the past 10 years we've seen many attempts at faux-free-trade agreements... corrupting deals negotiated in secrecy, intentionally hidden from pubic checks / balances, supporting big corporate interests and oligopolies.

That is not free trade.

When it comes to TPP in particular, I am radically opposed to their proposed IP laws. EFF has a short write up on how TPP undermines with digital IP: https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp
These-solar-panels-can-pull-drinking-water-straight-from-the-air
At the end of the day, it is about subsidizing an inefficient labor market. For the tariff to bring low value jobs back, it will have to be significant. Offshoring will still be more resource efficient, so you are better off paying back the tariff fees as welfare than bringing the jobs back. It would be much better to use the funds to re-educate this part of the population to work higher value jobs.

It is also disregarding the externalities of enacting a tariff. So we put something in place to bring electronic manufacturing back from China. They still control most of the raw materials, and can put their own tariff in place on export of those materials, further reducing our competitiveness. International politics are not so simple.
Trump Wants to Keep Parts of ACA: Pre-Existing Conditions and Coverage to Age 27
Integrations and plugins exist, and for me, browser integration was easy to set up.

http://keepass.info/plugins.html
What big innovation did you expect factory workers to create?
Interesting that people keep rolling out this tired meme when she only won by, what, 200k votes? Your argument isn't very powerful when the margins are so tiny; you're arguing for a technicality.
> In a social media age, if the filtered news can have its errors exposed easily, then trust will still decrease in it even if it is, hypothetically, 90% accurate.

Especially if the inaccuracies (or mere biases) all slant the same direction.
But he's not aware of the whole story. Japan is paying us money (billions, I think) to keep those bases there. I assume the same goes with other countries. This isn't free protection.
Thinking some more about, it would also make sense to look at some isotonic function of disposable income and disposable hours left (after work, commute, etc).

This is to capture that increasing working hours from 8h to 24h a day even when pay would be more than tripled, would leave you with a very sad life.

(Shadow) price of time would be a good one, too? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_price) In some sense, that's the same as marginal cost of your time, expressed in dollars or some `utils' or `hedons'.

Then you can say, eg taking a longer commute for a cheaper house would value my time at 30 hedons per hour---but spending time with my daughter is worth at least 50 hedons per hour. So it would be bad trade-off.
Eh, Bill Clinton passed NAFTA with a smile on his face. He should have demanded:

- 12 months family leave

- shorter work days

- mandatory 6 weeks vacation

- universal health

- etc

And then negotiate from there. But he didn't and the democrats in power at the time didn't. They were too busy patting themselves on the back for figuring out that cozying up to corporate America would allow them to compete with the Republicans.
US military dominance is what makes USD the world's reserve currency which in turn drives 30-40% of our GDP if we start to withdraw it will start to affect USD standing as a world's
reserve currency.
Used to be a decent reference site until they destroyed it with horrid trendy web design.

It's unreadable, now.
In so much as America is a "global cop", it's because we actually directly benefit the most from "continued peaceful existence of the world". We do the most trade, we are the largest economy. We have the most to lose.
> My guess is that we've been approaching this from a moral standpoint (human rights, freedom of speech, etc) but those arguments have never budged China

No offense but the USA is not in a position to give moral lessons ^^

It might be hard to imagine for an American but the rest of the world doesn't give a damn about your country.
> History shows that when America is not prepared is when the danger is greatest. We want to deter, avoid and prevent conflict through our unquestioned military dominance

My suspicion is that he wants less direct military involvement and a greater threat if military involvement is required.

That is, he's proposing that we replace the "World Police" model with the Swiss model.
See You in Court. It's Time to Fight
Trump has been as consistent as Bernie over the decades with regards to foreign policy. Here he is in 1988 on Oprah saying similar things to what he's said on the campaign trail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI

I don't agree with Trump but to think he really doesn't want to do the things he's been saying over the decades seems wrong.
So you only hire experienced developers? Where's your commitment to paying it forward? Where will we get the next generation of experienced coders if you don't give a few less than perfect candidates a chance? I guess if you get yours then screw everyone else, right? Or am I being too harsh and bitter?

When did we stop smart people who may not have fit precisely into the perfect little niche we've carved for them but showed a good ethic, and an ability to get the job done and learn new things as technologies evolve? We're really screwing up this industry in favor of getting it done fast, today.
Without globalism, you wouldn't have the internet as it is today, cheap computers, and smartphones wouldn't exist. High-tech depends on cheap asian manufacturing for its parts. Social media would be relatively negligible due to lack of network effects, and the 'peasants' love social media.
"He died how he lived—on Facebook."
That's a reasonable argument, and I'll have to read up more on it. What I posted above was via by economics classes from some time ago, so it may be time to actually take a look at the data.

By no means am I for trade restrictions - I was just commenting on the fact that the answer (like most of any complex issues) is "it depends".
Fine with me (although I disagree all that will occur under him, but it will be inevitable, all empires decline). It's not my responsibility to pay taxes to police the world (while European and other friends gloat to me about their welfare system). We've got a geographic advantage, we should use it. What's shocking is how has the rest of the world not realized that the US' track record in policing the world has been abysmal and destructive? I would prefer these decisions be distributed across the world rather than resting on the hands of the US population (don't get me started on them).
Well there's a selection bias here. When I read this news I literally cheered. But there's no reason to say anything about it, it is what it is.

I won, and I'm not sure what I'm expected to say beyond that.
That doesn't really go against what he said.
The 25% is not a consequence of the Electoral College system. The 25% is a consequence of only 50% of eligible voters voting, half of which voted for the winner.
This isn't just free trade, and many people were against the TPP a few months ago. It was such an unpopular position to support it that Clinton changed her position on it. If you've been following this issue it shouldn't really come as a surprise that most people are against it, at least on HN.
Countries that allow slavery shouldn't be allowed to be in a free trade agreement competing against American workers, for one.
Saw this a little bit before it was reported. Thought it was some bizarre Veteran's Day memorial.
> But the problem at least in the US is that the "proper channels" are purposely set so low as to encourage illegal immigration.

No, they're set to discourage inmigration that doesn't prove to be a net benefit to the country or doesn't serve a particular cause.

> Many industries, including Trump's field of construction rely on illegal immigrants for a large part of their labor source.

They rely on it for bigger profit margins; they don't need illegal immigration to exist. The market can perfectly adjust to the situation: If workers are pricing themselves too high to the point many building projects are no longer worth the investment, either the project doesn't happen and workers have to adjust their prices accordingly, the project is actually valuable enough for the client to cough up the extra cost or the intermediary (construction company) lowers their profits to stay competitive.
Because they're not going to always be interested in living under American hegemony.
I didn't mean to imply you had an agenda, sorry! Trump is just the most recent example of someone making vote-rigging claims.

As people have commented elsewhere in this discussion, an online voting system would probably be more vulnerable to fraud, given what we know of the methods and capabilities of the NSA and other organisations.

I agree that there's probably petty fraud going on here and there but I don't see the need for sweeping and risky changes to try to fix it.
I would be interested to see a tally of how many manufacturing jobs exist in China that are almost entirely exporters to the US.
Having recently bought a house, I have to disagree. It _may_ help with initial screening but you don't actually get a feel for the structure until you are in it.

There's a lot of little details you are looking for that wouldn't show up unless it was an extremely high resolution. On top of that, you are looking for subtle sounds and movement as you walk through the house. You're seeing if the floor is sagging, does the paint show water damage under certain lighting, etc.
These kinds of economic predictions are nearly impossible to prove or verify.

I remember approximately 1 week ago that Trump being elected would cause a global economic meltdown. Krugman himself said the stock market would "never recover" if he is elected.

And already stocks are up, and have been the last few days.
Clinton also stood against TPP.
Farming is the same way. Fewer people than in previous decades but we are manufacturing more and growing more food now than ever.
The cost of virtual calls (and calls in general) in the article is greatly exaggerated. Jumps, calls and indirect calls have an effective latency of zero as they are resolved in the fetch stage (and speculated if the target is not known) and a troughput of one taken jump every one or two cycles.

In a virtual call, the offset computation and load is only used to compute the jump target (which is only used later on commit), which means that is not on the critical path [1].

They consume execution and load bandwith, but that's not normally the bottleneck. The cost of virtual cals is usually due to missed optimizations and the possibility of misprediction.

[1] technically if the load is delayed long enough, the CPU might be prevented from committing the speculated instructions and eventually exhaust its reoerder buffer and stall.
At least you can access Wikipedia today, and you know with confidence that you can access it tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, next month, etc.

This is a luxury in China.

It has never been about specific outlets. It has always been about whether there are artificial obstacles between my computer and the rest of the free internet.

Before you could even decide whether or not to believe what you see, in China you are simply blindfolded in a non-deterministic (to you) fashion.
What if the US is actually already making a net gain on the security they provide? The Pax Americana had its upsides for the hegemon. (The Brits certainly liked their time at the top.)
EFF and others remain firmly opposed, after many blog posts.

This is a huge win, we can negotiate better agreements.
I guess this mimics human competition settings: you're allowed to examine the whole cube beforehand. Figuring out any valid solution is really trivial, esp. on a computer, it's just not hard.
but are they paying us what we expend? I think that's the point being made here.

And I don't know the answer to that question, but it's important in this discussion.
Key steps to inspire confidence as you move to DevOps
This is just one of those myths that gets bandied all around the web. It's a reserve currency because it's a huge balanced economy, and the dollars are freely floated and available. And it's not exactly proven that a strong dollar benefits the US altogether.
He just plainly thinks it's not enough. Here he is talking about how Japan is "beating the hell out of this country" and "they aren't paying" back in 1988 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI
If you think that's crazy, check out https://www.infoq.com/presentations/miniKanren at the 31:30 mark. These two guys teach their logic programming system a subset of scheme, then they can run it "backwards" to find quines - programs that evaluate to themselves.
Except China wants to keep the status quo.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-china-media-i...
Just pointing out how both parties are two sides of the same coin, but we're too busy calling each other bigots and fascists to realize this.
I'm also not sure what you mean...

Bound electrons (in an orbital) can only have 1 of 2 quantum "spin" states - which is in relation to the nucleus and/or the magnetic field. Up or down. With the spin-up electron having a slightly higher or lower energy level then the spin-down electron (depending on other factors).
funny you see her expression and you see Trump's expression and you'd think she "won." At least she won the popularity contest.
We're also sitting on an abundance of natural resources. In stark terms: We only rely on continued world peace because of globalization and our reliance on international trade. It isn't inconceivable that we could return to total self-sufficiency if we wanted to.
> It's about focusing on improving our own citizens' lives before pouring trillions into wars, offshore military bases, NATO defense payments and UN programs in the name of globalization

This is literally the exact same argument the first group of people to use the "America First" slogan made: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee

And what those people ended up accomplishing was making sure that when the U.S. finally did enter World War 2, it did so more or less unarmed and with its Pacific Fleet sitting at the bottom of Pearl Harbor. Which meant that it took longer to defeat the Axis than it should have, and a lot more Americans (and people, both military and civilian, in all the other nations that struggled against fascism) had to die to make that happen.

In the age of rapid transit and telecommunications, the world is even smaller than it was then. Which makes hiding behind the oceans that sit between us and the rest of the world even less viable of a strategy today than it was.
Thanks, added some changes to the readme: https://github.com/WhitestormJS/whitestorm.js
We've been hearing security folks and constitutionalists make this argument at least since the Patriot Act. "What happens if one day, we don't have a sensible person as president and they still have these extraordinary (and usually extra-constitutional) powers?"

Like most sensible things, the criticism was brushed aside so here we are.
I've been a Feedly user since Google Reader shut down and have been pretty happy with it. The tings I subscribe to there I read from top to bottom every day.

When I'm looking for something outside of that, I've found the Apple News app to be shockingly good. For the things I read, it does a much better job of showing me interesting things than Google's Newsstand app. This surprises me because Google knows a lot more about me than Apple.