skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For the sake of you, me, and all other women out in the world, please don't let Clinton being a woman let the first thing that comes to mind. Your reasoning after that is much more sound and argued. But reinforcing the separation of sexes can only help men. Look at Western Europe: our gender is not even considered, so please don't let people consider it. It can only turn negative.
Keep strong, friend.
Not sure how electing an openly racist, sexist, vengeful narcissist furthers that goal, but okay.
Sounds great, but I thought Australia was gravely concerned about so-called "boat people."
In addition to Trump winning, the GOP will hold a majority in both houses of Congress, further empowering conservatives.

This is not the outcome many on the left expected.
I support globalization, and agree computerization will be more disruptive (in the future). But that you, and democrats, and the establishment republicans ignore the jobs lost to globalization over the last 30 years is exactly what leads to a reactionary election and a Trump presidency.
I made about $200 trading a small amount of money on the forex markets while I watched the live coverage. I was surprised the yen didn't drop that much, but I also missed the article about the BOJ saying they would intervene.
That's a lot...
I think it's valid criticism. There's a (excruciating) description of a use case, (valid) attempts to build a solution, and reaching the point where someone tells you "No, you can't have that because I don't want to" - whoever that may be - is understandably frustrating.

Especially when the facility in question solves a real PITA of a problem.

Now, the author was obviously venting, he even admits it. Nonetheless, the complaint is justified.
> Grew up in the US. I'm a minority. I think this is the only time in my life I've ever felt like I didn't belong in America.

It's not that simple.

There was a large section of the Indian-American community that voted Trump; presumably this was also true of "non-minority" minorities like assorted Asians and Jews.
Full disclosure: I'm a Hillary voter, after much internal fretting about voting third party or writing in Obama.

Looking at the reactions on my Facebook feed, the large majority of people seem to be taking from this experience the learning that Trump voters are all disgusting misogynistic racist pigs, and America deserves to be damned for its sins against the pro-Clinton media orthodoxy.

It's tiring, because in terms of concrete policies, I line up fairly closely with what I imagine Clinton's "true" beliefs to be. But anyone who mentions anything against the progressive catechism is evil. If you even misprioritize items on the agenda, you become evil. And everyone with actual power seems to be in on this train out to condemn the bad think--academia, the media, corporate management, you name it. Even now I worry about this comment being tracked to my real identity and facing professional repercussions because of implying that the bad think can sometimes be reasonable.

My hope is that this loss forces left activists to re-evaluate how they treat dissent.
Do you not remember the animosity of the GOP towards Trump?

Clinton was almost unanimously favoured by Wall St. and large corporations.
For what it's worth, I doubt the infrastructure was that good to begin with. Sites put up by my country's government are only set up to handle normal load.
Speaking of India, the election of Modi further confirms the Brexit-Trump trend.
The LA times poll did not get it wrong.
I'm a white Trump voter in flyover country. You belong in America as do all Americans. This was a push back against an out of touch corrupt elite in Washington and mass immigration. Not all immigration, but the massive increases of the past several decades. Yes, we do want to preserve the culture - not white culture but American culture. I fully expect that Trump will reach out and moderate. If not, there's always another election that's just two years away.
Yes, top VCs did pass. There was a good article about how Google Ventures was initially interested but passed when they didn't see any evidence of functioning product.
for consulting learning norwegian would probably be an advantage.
That's interesting. The anti-immigration right in the UK hold your immigration system up as the way forward.

We have a multicultural society in the UK that many are rejecting, with racial tensions at a high.

The difference is that many immigrants are working class. They are scapegoated to great success with the white working class. I disagree with that - I think the real problem is meagre infrastructure investment to support new arrivals but perhaps the Aussie style system works on the other end of the spectrum: focus only on valuable people where value is how much money they would earn.
Disclosure: Canadian here.

Trump won because the Democrats railroaded their best candidate in favor of someone who is profoundly unlikeable and untrustworthy. Regardless of if she is truly a criminal, or not, the Democratic party choose a candidate who is under investigation by the FBI instead of a candidate that had real honest to god connection with the working people of the country. The voters have literally said that even Trump is better than what the Democrats have tried to ram down their throats this election. This election was lost, not won.
Obama rode to power on change ticket and immediately abandoned it, wholesale.

OK that didn't work so who else you got? Bernie, outsider with nothing, no money, no establishment friends, too old, been a democtat for 5 minutes and nearly got the democratic nomination and the dem establishment hate him and broke the rules fighting him. Donald has fame and got the republican nomination. Republican establishment hate him.

American voters want change.
Change at any cost right now. And they'll keep trying for it.

There has been no meaningful political reform. Regulatory capture and gerrymander are the norm. People hate it. They genuinely hate the status quo, the political establishment. Really hate it.

Whoever is judged the most likely to do something, anything, in the way of reform has a huge advantage. You can be inexperienced and African American, you can be a blow-hard who inherited a billion dollars. Doesn't matter if people actually believe you are more for change and reform than the opposition.

It's not the only important thing but having credibility as an agent for change is extremely valuable. Hilary had precisely no credibility on that count and was proud of it .
Perhaps because, aside from when he was running for the nomination, Sanders isn't a Democrat! He's an Independent who tried to take control of the party (the nominee becomes the head of the party after all) - why would party insiders have any loyalty to him over Clinton?
> That's just wrong. Indian culture - and culture - is far, far more than a dance or some dish.

I think there's a key concept missing from every discussion about culture, and that concept is that "X immigrant culture" is a completely different culture from "X culture." Indians in India have one culture, while Indians in e.g. Britain have a related, but divergent culture.

Two places this matters:

• Frequently, the people of "X immigrant culture" care a lot about 'preserving their heritage', because it's a constant struggle for them—while the people of "X culture" couldn't give a damn, because they're constantly steeped in their own culture and it's not going away. "Cultural appropriation" is an invention almost entirely of immigrant cultures.

• People "exploring a culture" frequently have the implicit goal of exploring the domestic-immigrant offshoot of a culture, not the native one. Because of the lack of connection and cultural touchstone organizations that immigrants face, things like dances and dishes are seen as far more relevant in immigrant cultures, similar to their role in itinerant cultures.
let's hope that Peter Thiel can use his influence to do some good and not just for himself.
The Electoral College exists for a reason, you know.

BTW the estimated popular vote is between 0.7 and 1.3% in Hillary's favor at this point , according to NYT http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president . Not really a big difference.
And it shows they're basically alienated from half the country. Hence the "bubble."
Thanks for the down-votes HN. Motivated me to go vote in Pennsylvania for Trump.
But there is a valid reason for it. The US is a union of States, and they hold real power. I am not sure they should give up their power because it is too complicated for some people to understand. At the same time, I would prefer States to allot their electoral votes proportionally so that they could properly represent their population. Nevertheless, there would still be rounding errors.
> Software development and IT jobs that moved to India and China are blue collar? Call centers?

They're working class. Maybe not traditionally blue collar, but yes.
Your points mirror my experience, but could you explain why breakdown of civic institutions (an observation I've also made) matters?
Someone who speaks LOTS of value, often. You would do very well to read his blog posts (kalzumeus.com) and follow his comments here on HN.

He wants others to be successful in their efforts, and gives lots of good info on how to do just that.
White guilt is a large reason why white people are afraid to assert themselves and their racial identity. You're basically labeled a bigot if you don't support the cause of nihilistic globalism and moral leveling.
I'm also a dev from NZ, and I worked in the US a few years ago. Honestly it's not all it's cracked up to be, and I wouldn't choose to go back there. Trump didn't factor into that decision, but now it's even less enticing.
I'm hoping for general electoral reform.

The US is too large and diverse to adequately satisfy its populace with the current system.
It says more about the media -- in a short-sighted quest for ratings and quarterly reports -- stops doing journalism and starts being a vector for political click-bait.

Even just the Halo-effect of ridiculous claims being requoted verbatim is huge, even when followed with rebuttals.
>> should the average man on the street really decide? <<

As opposed to who? We had only land owning white males voting early in the Republic. They were educated and well acquainted with the issues. They voted their interests, which was those of land owning white males.

Limit the election to whatever group you prefer, and they will vote for their own interests.
Absolutely the most depressing political event of my life. I would have generally written off an outcome like this as a product of personal mosanthropy and pessimism, only held in check by past results that surprised me in a good way.

While my filter bubble isn't solid enough to not understand this, I truly wish it wasn't the case.

As our new president-elect says; so sad.
> the value has been significantly lowered by approximately ~10 to 20% consider when the money gets deposited, there would be an income tax due on it.

How do you figure it's 10%-20%? AFAIK it's a 300% penalty now after the voluntary disclosure scheme has ended (for income that was gained before Sep 30). People are better off burning the money if they can't launder it somehow.
I think he will be fine for the H1B and and other skilled immigrant programs.

Lower corporate taxes would be good, but I don't think it will be realistic. However, some kind of deal for tax repatriation for large multinationals might be possible. This could bring a lot of money back into the country by the likes of Apple and others.

Tariffs might have some impact as well depending on the type of company/labor and source countries affected (China/Mexico).
I've never been much of an HRC fan, but it's hard to see what she could have done differently, based on the information available. Aside from "don't be Hillary Clinton, with all the baggage that involves", of course. A candidate less well-known to the public might have done better in a "change"-focused election.

But she pretty much ran a campaign according to all the best practices, and lost to a guy who basically did everything wrong (within the scope of the campaign) that you could do wrong. The problem wasn't in the Clinton campaign. The problem was that the electorate didn't want what she was selling, despite a very good sales pitch.

I suspect there's going to be a lot of analysis focusing on exactly what level of positional compromise would have gotten the Democrats enough votes in the Midwest and Appalachian states to win (off the top of my head: an about-face on gun control and some sort of mea culpa on NAFTA might do it), but I don't think the Democrats could have known that in advance. Any more than any of the Republicans who lost to Trump in the primaries could have known how badly they were underestimating the latent anger of voters when they ran their own by-the-book campaigns.
goodbye baltic states. you had a good run. im sure putin will enjoy his empire.
I think the problem is that the "plebs" don't just hate the elites, they also hate minorities and people who don't have their religion; and they have big issues with patriarchy and sexism.

That's why the minorities and the "elites" don't respect them. In the end "the left" doesn't care if they are poor or uneducated and whatnot, they'd still embrace them. But refusing to accept basic democratic ideals of equality and freedom of religion and separation of church and state is always going to be a problem.
I cannot edit previous message, so let discuss a bit further. I'm sick, has high body temperature and unable sleep anyway.

To develop intuition, first you must understand that we are not moving through space, we are propagating through space, because we are waves. Actually, nothing is moved, hence no drag between material objects and space.

I will use video above as example. If you measure speed of sound in water between waves around droplets, you will found that speed of sound is constant, regardless of speed of droplet, because water is not moving at all. Water is contracting and expanding in place. We can perceive «lower» speed of sound in water in case of really big waves, because distance to travel will increase slightly. This is how gravitational waves are caught. Otherwise we are out of luck: we are counting waves to measure distance and time, and that count is not changing when space contracts and expands.

So the only two solutions I see to prove that space is real thing, like water, using waves only, is to:

1) cool vacuum below 0K — cooled vacuum will have slightly different speed of light (someone in USA is already working on that, shortly after discussion about „frozen vacuum“ at HN ;-). It's possible to cool or heat water using acoustic, but we are propagating through space, so cooled vacuum will be left in place while we will propagate away. Hard task. Can be done in interstellar space if ship will be able to stand at same place, or if large enough setup will be used quickly.

2) measure tiny asymmetry of front vs back of pilot wave using Sagnac effect to show that there are small deviations between predicted values and actual values, which are varying over year, as direction of movement and our position in Solar system changes (Solar system already had that asymmetry as measured by Voyagers). I saw (or I think that I saw) paper with exactly that information: experiment with large Sagnac interferometer conducted for over year with high precision which was focused on these deviations, but I still cannot find it. :-(
not blaming bezos. and the spelling mistake was unintentional. just trying to keep an open mind and an awareness of media bias.
Whenever I hear those arguments, I have to bring up a point:

There is a very good reason why big, powerful empires always have a big military, meddle and stick their noses into everyone's affairs.

Economic power doesn't come from thin air. It has a lot to do with political power, influence and domination.

Those are two sides of the same coin, they support and nurture each other.

You reach limits of growth when you just trade and build up your own economy.

Almost all foreign policy is dedicated to furthering self-serving goals. Often medium and long term, so not apparently visible. Often related to things the public know very little about. Just as often, completely misguided.

But there's always a reason.
> They are not interested in facts, or empathy, or calmly discussing how to face an uncertain and complex world.

Doesn't this describe the other side? "Deplorables," "ignorant ruralites," "uninformed -ist -phobes"? Is that attitude interested in empathy or calmly discussing things?

> Interested in hiring whatever strong-man seems most likely to make the bad people stop doing tbe bad things and make the good times happen

Isn't this exactly how Obama got elected? "Hope and change", and Obama's been practically worshipped as a savior ever since.

> The politics of fear won

I think fear had a lot to do with this result, but those fears are grounded in reality. One candidate acknowledged the problems that have arisen in the last decade, while the other did not. Time will tell how well he actually handles them.
no more palantir racial discrimination lawsuit.
No - for scores of Trump voters, globalization and the resultant outsourcing of factory work that they relied on was definitely a problem.

It's not A isn't / B is. Both globalization and automation of work are creating discontent.
Why Did Trump Win
This line of argument would be more persuasive if any of the Republicans, Trump or otherwise, had proposed an alternative that amounts to more than letting people fend for themselves
I hate democracy. Most voters aren't informed at all. Attractive candidates win 2.5 times more often than less attractive ones. Money and crappy 30 second ads apparently influence the outcome. First past the post voting means no one can even vote for what they really want to begin with.

It wouldn't be so bad if the president didn't have enormous power. And they aren't supposed to. But it's been growing so much over the years. Maybe now people will understand why its so important to limit it.
Will the real direction on those issues come from Trump or the mass of influence in political power under him? I think the latter. I think his grand plans will be largely neutered by a more level-headed GOP (relatively speaking), but they will also have more strength to push socially conservative issues.

More years spent getting caught up on intraspecies drama (bathroom use!) rather than working on big ideas.
And the password is the hash of the master password, which gives the evil all other passwords.
The US was the sum of N European cultures, mostly western, mostly northern. So assimilation wasn't as big a leap.
> how much "damage" is President Trump going to be able to do

Probably a lot less than people think domestically -- I suspect he's going to find his hands tied nearly as much as Obama. (And the outbursts of frustration we're likely to see from him as result will probably be epic.) Foreign relations are going to be interesting for a while though, and the stock market is probably going to crash, if it hasn't already.
That catchphrase originated from a campaign that took place during an actual economic recession. The current overall state of the economy was not a decisive factor in this election, though perceptions or fears about it might have been.
It was intended to be more like "if you can't get hold of a game in any other way, ROMs are an invaluable resource". I didn't realise that Nintendo had such an array of old games available on new consoles.

It's been ten years since I tried to play Double Dragon 2, the landscape has clearly changed lots more than it did in the fifteen since the console went out of fashion.
I think it boils down to Clinton not being a good candidate - she's "the establishment", a woman, and has no charisma. You can't have all three and still win.

Obama had the "handicap" of being black and "a funny name" but has plenty charisma and was seen as an outsider. Trump has charisma (for some) and is an outsider. Clinton has no redeeming quality in the eye of the electorate, even many who voted for her did so to stop Trump, not because they believed in her.
Qvarn: Storing and accessing personal information properly
Since the GOP now holds both Congress and the Presidency, with a possibility of the Supreme Court majority, they may enact some protectionist policies to appease the voters. However, they could in fact make the economic situations worse and some people would start to blame other things.

Could the backlash spill to the technology and related sectors as well? (e.g. a neo-luddite movement might get started)

Note: I did not grow up in the US, so I would like to hear your opinions on this, especially from Americans.
Viewers stop changing the channel when Trump is on screen. That's all there is to that.

When the media spins something up into a narrative, they're just grabbing those narrative devices out of a hat full of tricks that have worked in the past to engage viewers.

I've got 15 years working in media. There's no conspiracy, it's just run of the mill shameless opportunism. 'Look at that, they're eating this shit up, feed them more!'
they get rightfully derided for it

Yeah but one could have observed that shouting/bullying down someone because of their beliefs is counterproductive in getting them to reconsider them. It's not like there wasn't any warning to this.
The US does have universal suffrage, it's just that the President isn't elected by the popular vote. There are ways to achieve that though:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...
and if he does what he's said and re-implements stop and frisk and every non-white citizen has to frequently deal with the indignity of being searched all the time?
Your sentiment while delightful isn't in line with the sort of policies Trump has been promoting during his campaign.
http://whydidtrumpwin.com
Upvoted.

At the same time:

Who knew that:

* cheating against wildly popular Sanders,

* being partly responsible for recent wars,

* have your campaign talking like many of your opponents (and a good number of potential voters) are dumb racists

wouldn't be a surefire way to get elected?

Edit: last bullet, blame it on campaign instead of her personally, also most->many
I don't see why not?
http://howdiddonaldtrumpwin.com/
"Compared to the Bay Area you'll pay 1/2-1/4th of the rent/mortgage and soon 1 EUR will be 2 USD"

1 Euro is currently ~ $1.10 US. Are you being facetious?

I agree with you on everything else though. Everything in Berlin seems reasonably priced. And it seems like a good quality of life there for a city. People seem pretty relaxed.
> "life-threatening condition which my US insurance would never have covered"

I wonder how is that possible? Insurance plans these days have to cover you even if you have a pre-existing condition, even the cheapest plans cover everything after a deductible, unless I am missing something
Sanders vs. Trump would have seen Sanders lose by a larger margin. "Young democrats" is a tiny demographic that can't swing an election, openly embracing the "socialist" label would have "excited" a lot of people all right - to vote against him.
Thank you.

There is 3 issues which Im trying to clear up here. With GCM and Signal:

1, Google and in turn USA based data-centers receive events/more-data to analyze. That this data is not the encrypted message, not the decrypted message doesnt matter. This data can be analyzed and used effectively. Its not impossible to think of "push-message for android phone available at X time - which looking through our other database shows it has Signal but doesnt have WhatsApp, hm, our other databse shows that android device has Signal app usage of X%". Oh boy.

2. Google has root on your phone, so even if the transport security is very good, it doesnt matter as the phone is effectively owned by Google and thus messages/keys can be stolen at will.

3. The choice should be with the users and not Moxie. Moxie has shown contempt and disregard for users wishes, see quote "annoy the fucking hell out of our users".