skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> You like the person who lies to you to exploit you more than the person who tells you the truth about your problems and cares for your well being.

Have you ever thought about what it might be like to disagree with someone on something, yet respect them for having an honest difference of opinion? You know, without assuming they're an idiot?

> Btw. a person can't change his skin color, his birth place, or with which physical organs (s)he's born with. But he can very well decide to accept that his shame comes from not educating himself, from hoping others would come and make his life Great Again, from not recognizing that only exploiters would promise him something unrealistic like that. And he can decide to do something about it.

Totally irrelevant to my point. The point is that either side can group an opponent's voter blocks together and marginalize them as stupid / tricked / pointless. It suggests they don't have valid views and it's not fair.
He was voted for president democratically, that's the populous signing their part of the contract.
This system is interesting but has a crucial flaw: I legally can't take part. I have a job now, which claims ownership over any tech-related IP I create. There are processes for getting exceptions, but a) you won't get them for actual job-related things b) I'm not asking Google for an exception so I can interview somewhere else.

This is true for nearly anyone with a standard SV job. So if you're willing to restrict your pool to the currently unemployed, this can work, but I think you'd rather not do that.
Or the planet's ecosystem.
"Six measures to clean up the corruption and special interest collusion in Washington, DC"

Ok, I'm on board with all of those... Then, besides a few other points, it just gets worse and worse the further into it you go.

If he accomplishes all 6, or even half, that's great. I just hope he won't have enough time to ruin everything else. At least now (especially after Dubya) we know we need outsiders vigilantly watching every move (and non-move) he makes.
I found that bridged networking does not work at all, no traffic flows, but the default 'shared' networking works perfectly.

I'm now doing an update of CentOS and will install the latest stable kernel from elrepo kernel-ml and fio, then I'll benchmark disk IO (I'm running a PCIe NVMe SSD that averages 1600-2000MB/s for sequential writes/reads so this should be interesting)
> coal is one of the cheapest fuels around

> the result is you're going to wind up with a lot less usable energy

Nothing in those "basic thermodynamics" conclusions, which I agree are obviously true, implies that it's commercially nonviable. Yes, it will by necessity be more expensive than dirty coal. Will it be more expensive than anything else? I'm not sure. It would require advanced knowledge of sequestering methods and the energy market. Certainly more than basic thermodynamics.

To be honest, you're the one making the mistake here by assigning "clean coal" to being snake oil with only basic thermodynamics in play. Without more knowledge than that, there's no reason it couldn't be the most viable clean energy option.
The weird thing is talking about "curl pipe"ing into Python when you have a local copy? Wha?
If you are energy independent then you can screw the international market. If you can server yourself then you do not have to dance by the music of other producers.

Unless of course you want to play some other game altogether.
I wish more companies would give example problems to solve in your own time. I did one for a fairly large Australian company, and they rejected it. By the time they got round to letting me know (very long turn around time) I had already found other employment. But still, their reasons for rejecting my solution - the output was not formatted to their liking, and they didn't seem to know what an anonymous function was - was hugely beneficial to me. I would not have been a good fit at all.
So, I should not have said "Pakistani". He's actually an American-born, his parents came here in early 80s. Is that still a problem you think? Would a defense contractor be hesitant in hiring native-born citizens with parents from a different country of origin?
Not sure what this has to do with my comment with regard to Hillary's gender.
Saudi Arabia.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-13/saudi-arabia-has-fu...
> can scale into the 1000's of nodes + maintain constant performance as it scales.

So transaction throughput stays at 5-15 tx/s and does not increase as you add nodes?
Tell him it's OK to use the Internet to solve problems and encourage him to learn from others code but to be honest about it. Then if he's actually able to solve problems using others code, go get him a job because he's figured out a way to get things done despite his inexperience.
> Among college-educated whites, 45% voted for Clinton – 39% of men and 51% of women (the only white demographic represented in the poll where the former secretary of state came out on top). But 54% of male college graduates voted for Trump, as did 45% of female college graduates.

Fascinating, pretty strong turnout for Trump with college educated folks! Clinton's numbers reflect that she lost a ton of male votes to third party.

> But among the 64% of American voters who earn more than $50,000 a year, 49% chose Trump, and 47% Clinton.

Middle class came out for Trump too. I wish they'd break out higher income brackets, that's where I'm at. And I guess that Clinton's support there is much stronger - which reflects the disconnect Murray describes in cultures and political leanings between the urban wealthy classes and the rest of the population.
Don't Expect the Supreme Court to Change Much
>But I am not going to buy a laptop that won't run Linux. have any recommendations?

Just keep buying Thinkpads. They are fine and support Linux. I would stay away from regular consumer laptops anyway.
> some high people drinking Slurpees on a couch watching cartoons

You were probably generalizing to get your point across succinctly but to those who assume the above is true: you'd be surprised by how many lawyers, programmers, engineers, technicians etc use it every day to gain a sense of nuance the way a coffee drinker would sink an espresso for a stimulant effect.

It's also worth noting that the Indica strain is the couch-slob strain of marijuana, while Sativa is the head-high. To borrow from a reply I posted a little over a month ago: Your typical sativa high is a sensitivity to music in the way that sounds are broken down spatially, rhythms and bass seem more appealing, an intensity of thoughts - as in the small things now take on more meaning, imagery seems more interesting, colors pop, and it provides a general sense of relaxation as long as you're in a fairly predictable environment, yet you're in total control.
This is false. Go to NYC and you'll find some poor children that did, in fact, grow up in one-room efficiencies, or lower-middle-class families in Tokyo. Their houses become places to sleep, and the entire city becomes the house most of the time otherwise. It is not common in America but it is certainly doable. Whether or not it is desirable to the children or the parents is a different story.
> That people can equate breaking the rules using a personal email server with recorded audio of a candidate condoning and admitting sexual assault.

I think most Trump supporters saw a pattern of behavior in Clinton that they trusted even less than Trump's gaffes. Not so much that they condoned sexual assault, but they'd rather the devil who speaks clearly than the devil who seems to have a secret in every closet.
What do you mean by "fake" issues? Do you mean "issues where there is no disagreement" or "issues where I don't perceive any reasonable disagreement"? The former is a reasonable definition of fake issues, so that's the one I'll use.

> Immigration

If conservative and liberal economists agree, then this is the only issue that qualifies as "fake" by the above definition I mentioned. However, I don't think that the Cato position represents a right-wing consensus.

> Terrorism

You're not employing the statistics you cited correctly. First, terrorist attacks are black swans[0]. Saying that terrorism killed very few this year or even past ten years is misleading at best. Second, most of those firearm deaths are suicides. Certainly sad and need to be addressed, but also dishonest to compare directly against terrorist attacks and using the word "deaths" to obscure the difference between suicide and murder rates.

> Gay Marriage

May be clear cut to you, but is still contentious within the broader population and therefore not a fake issue. Also, there has certainly been conflicts with freedom of association. You can claim that restricting those rights is worth it, but you cannot claim they are not being restricted. There's also plenty to criticize in the legal reasoning behind the supreme court ruling.

> Bathrooms

Who uses what bathroom has largely been a matter of culture and custom. You can claim that such customs are wrong and need to be changed, but if you mandate that change through law and you are going to have a bad time.

> Obamacare

Not a fake issue.

[0]http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/08/31/terrorists-vs-chairs-an...
Trump is for cutting taxes and spending, so how would he re-educate the workforce and make sure they get decent skills? His party is the same, they don't want to help anybody except the rich and profitable corporations who fund their campaigns, and want you to just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and work harder.

The Republicans were part of Congress' gleeful global corporate sell-out, and support international corporations getting more tax cuts and handing out jobs to the cheapest people in other countries even more than the Democrats do; the only things both parties can agree on are more war and more money to the rich and corporations at the expense of the worker.
Of course I can ignore the indirect influence; if the company had no actual value at IPO its share price would plummet. Also, by definition the S&P 500 only includes companies which have had 4 consecutive quarters of positive GAAP earnings, so the shares would have value on the public markets. Specifically, they'd have to have enough value to be among the 500-or-so largest positive-earnings companies by market capitalization. Hardly value that can be attributable to indirect influence of an index fund.
I really don't get why you'd deregulate housing/construction.

You don't allow free market to "balance itself" in industries with natural monopolies (e.g. utilities, cellular operators).

Beyond a certain distance, commuting to a city is impractical, so the space for residential development is limited (= there is a hard cap on how much stuff you can build).

The utilities are heavily regulated (for good reasons), why shouldn't the government start regulating the housing market on the same grounds?

Another thing to consider, there is nothing inherently "free market" about letting anyone build whatever they want, as long as it's on their land. Taxing, classifying and partitioning land by area covered is as arbitrary as taxing by window count[1] or house width[2]. Why not evaluate and sell vertical lots? Up from certain height, large areas are reserved for air traffic already, so there is a precedent.

It could look like this picture[3], the central beam would be regulated akin to roads today.

1 http://www.historyhouse.co.uk/articles/window_tax.html

http://www.colinsnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/154-22...

2 https://mjwrightnz.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/amsterdams-taxin...

3 http://www.evolo.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/vertical-stre...
Sure, not ideal, but as long as there's nothing that says "you must spend as much or more energy to separate and sequester harmful by-products than you get from the reaction" we shouldn't mock people for at least entertaining the idea.

No, we should mock people for entertaining the idea and being unable to muster enough knowledge and reason to start being very skeptical. It's basically the same sort of estimation that happens when watching Shark Tank and wondering, "Well, that's a nifty product. What are the margins?" Basic Thermodynamics isn't too far off from accounting. There's a big difference between "works technically, in theory" and "would it work in the real world?" Essentially, you're saying it's okay that people can spout basic science, but still can't apply it in their actual lives in a market economy. Shouldn't that be the lower bar?
Right, because that's working out so well for them.
I gave the most consideration to Toptal of all the gig sites, but ultimately even the high end of their rates are below market, at least for someone with 3–5 years experience doing web APIs for startups. I still may consider them for short gigs down the road, but I definitely think it's better to have your own clients.
Ah, in a lengthier response that I deleted I addressed that headline. That story is basically an opinion piece in the Style section. It's not a piece of investigative journalism. There are no new facts reported in it.

And yes, I am dead serious that there is no evidence that the story was entirely fabricated. There is evidence details were fabricated. You take that as evidence that the story was fabricated in its entirity, but the quoted editor does not and I do not.

I don't understand why you find it so hard to entertain the possibility that a pathological liar might be raped and then exaggerate the details of the story to gain sympathy.

Why do you see that as an impossibility?

I acknowledge it as a possibility, I acknowledge the possibility that she was not raped at all and made up the story from whole cloth, and I acknowledge that we don't know which really happened. Just as the quoted editor did.
> I think you can get a pretty big tax cut by just managing the military better.

I find it interesting that in the US people are comfortable discussing improving military efficiency, yet its taboo to discuss reducing the size of the military.

With a concerted effort it would be a major accomplishment to improve military efficiency by 5-10%. Or you could cut the military budget by 40% and still outspend every other nation's military. Yet, I don't recall ever hearing a candidate suggest reducing the military's budget. Hell even after the cold war didn't spending go up after a brief decline?
If you can't understand why words might mean something completely different to anyone who's got a completely different context built around it, you are either ignorant or too arrogant to care either way.
In complete agreement; well stated. Since the Constitution was written, the population has increased, what, a couple of orders of magnitude? And yet the same 435 reps?
I'd like at least a switch to completely disable 2G (on iPhone as well). In Australia, the last 2G networks will all have shut down by the end of next year. So even now, unless you phone only supports 2G there's absolutely no reason to use it (the 2G is thoroughly redundant at this point so you should never need to drop down to it).
That's not what I've observed. The discussions actually turn out to be quite inflammatory when these matters are involved. Even folks that claim to have PhDs in language design consistently confuse these concepts. That's the only way I can explain all the condescending remarks when it comes to things like type systems, monads, curry-howard correspondence, etc. In fact the above article is a response to one such inflammatory and condescending blog post by a programmer who clearly values theoretical beauty and specific patterns that typeclasses enable above software engineering pragmatism. Although I can see how typeclasses help in cutting down boilerplate in this case his tone does not help make that point.

I'm no stranger to abstract and theoretical beauty. My undergrad and grad training is in pure math but I also understand that theorems and proofs don't necessarily lead to good software engineering in the large. So valuing the abstractions is great and all but using it as the ultimate arbiter of good language design is not.
> the architecting and consideration of interplay between components takes the bulk of the time.

Which is supposed to be what is simplified as LOC goes down.

So if a supposed 5x-10x code reduction (which I've never seen real evidence of) doesn't lead to 5x-10x productivity increase, how much increase is there supposed to be? Surely more than zero?
That's still only 50% of the country. If someone says something racist in front of you, take the time and discomfort to confront them. "Hey, that's a person too. Trying living by the Golden Rule a bit more" Etc.

We are the country we create, whoever is in power.
>Perhaps Trump should ask Israel for help in building his wall.

I'm sure he will ask them for engineering help and guidance.
In Elixir you never have to write an iteration, no need to dance the "for-loop-with-counter" dance.

Pattern matching makes it easy to bind variables and validate their values in one line (so no needs for if statement).

In Elixir, you usually don't catch exceptions, you let it crash. So all the code to handle failures/errors doesn't exist, it is handled by OTP.

No need to write any communication layer since it's built-in OTP that implements location transparency.

These are kind of the low hanging fruits on top of my head. I'll point out that fewer lines of code doesn't automatically translate to increased productivity. Also, transitioning to a brand new stack is not always justifiable/possible even with the promise of significant increased in productivity, it's really not that simple.
Like right to bear arms?
Playing devil's advocate here: how will this come back to bite you if you do it on your own time and equipment? How would the current employer know to care?
Not saying you should require your candidates to break the law. Also, though IANAL, California does have laws that give employees the right to their own IP on their own time/equipment when it doesn't use work IP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2208056)
Certainly.

Man's marriage vows: I, ____, take you, ____, to be my wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and worship, till death us do part, according to God's holy law, and this is my solemn vow.

Wife's marriage vows: I, ____, take you, ____, to be my husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and obey, till death us do part, according to God's holy law, and this is my solemn vow.

Marriage was a lifelong contract between a man and a woman for the purpose of producing healthy, well-adjusted children in a stable family unit. Lifelong means "till death do us part". If it isn't lifelong, it isn't marriage. Also note the woman's vow to obey.

Plus, marriage used to involve virgin brides. The man would marry to get access to a woman he would not have otherwise had access to, both for sexual gratification and for sexual reproduction.

If one cannot enforce one's marriage contract, and one and possibly many others have fucked one's wife-to-be before marriage, then what exactly is the difference between a marriage and a casual LTR?

Protesting homosexual marriage after one accepts the destruction of heterosexual marriage is probably the dumbest thing any conservative ever does.
The more important aspect is preventing local police from having to act as immigration agents. That has a very real effect on crime: illegal immigrants don't have to be afraid of talking to police. I think we're safer when everyone feels free to report crimes and act as witnesses.
is Spotify signed at all? Anyway, worked for me (used '------;' with the python script above).
Private prisons are also (primarily?) up because Obama promised to end use of private prisons at the federal level: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/18/obama-administrat...
You guys are all adorable software devs :-). You're trying to solve a problem with software that just isn't that big a deal: high endurance drives exist, or just buy a new one every year.
I thought the idea was to make an API behave like a webpage by using hyperlinks that represents the state of the application, so in theory a "smart" client could navigate an API autonomously like a human interacts with a web page ? Because otherwise it's no different from RPC.
Operating a monetary transmittal service in the United States without implementing KYC-AML (which is what he is basing this on) is practically suicide. Even retailers will send you to customer service to complete a form for buying too many gift cards.
Has an opinion and works with computers.
I fail to see how a tyranny of the minority is better than a tyranny of the majority. The current winner-take-all system must provide one or the other.
Is that because the federal law assumes an expansion of Medicaid, but your state didn't do it?
Yay! Thank you human CEO being.
I meant "not a thing" in a real-world economic sense. You know, the context that national politics should be concerned with.
You can't go off like this on Hacker News. If you feel like you'd like to try again, please email us at hn@ycombinator.com. We're happy to unban accounts if we feel you'll comment civilly and substantively in the future.
Yeah, this. A little discretion goes a long way.
I don't mind homework, but companies need to start specifying their salary range up front. I've been having a lot of time wasted lately by getting through Tech Interview #1 or Homework #1, only to find out their max salary is laughable for San Francisco.

"You should just find that out upfront" I hear you saying. Well that is not always possible. Recruiters either don't know the range, or lie about not knowing, or you have to submit a big packet of info (cover letter, history, resume, homework) before you can even talk to a human about salary.
Concur wholeheartedly. Just not very optimistic. But who knows?
And yet plenty of programmers somehow manage to ship perfectly good solutions to everyday problems without "generic programming" capabilities as you define them. The author of "Elm is Wrong" might have good intentions but the tone of that post is so condescending and inflammatory that all the points being made are lost. The title alone already starts everything on the wrong foot.

Instead of sitting on such a high horse the more constructive approach is to outline the shortcomings, implement the solution, and contribute it upstream. That's not what I see though. Most of these "critical" posts end up just being that. Comparing a language that programmers use every day to ship working solutions to another one that has considerably smaller mindshare and community and then calling the more popular solution a failure because it doesn't have the feature from the more "pure and elegant" language. There is clearly a disconnect in tone and intent across all such posts.

I don't have any horses in these races. Programming languages are just tools and the religious zealotry around them does not appeal to me.
I loved this series. It inspired us to do similar experiments with SSDs as we were spec'ing out new servers. I highly recommend doing this so you get a feel for what SMART looks like for your specific SSDs. Its nice to be able to monitor that to have some idea when your SSDs are going to die, especially if most of your drives are aging together.
Thanks, I'm glad we agree.

I also agree that lambasting all 47% is a bad idea. I never said that it was good; I just made a statement that a portion of those 47% are horrible people who are emboldened by Trump's demagoguery and will make life difficult for minorities like me (which, as you described is a subset of your statement). I made no comment describing the rest of your statement (perhaps you misread my initial reply to you as a blanket statement when it wasn't meant as such?) and I don't disagree with you on it. I would be very happy if we could find a way to make America work for everyone, rich or poor, white or coloured.