skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not US citizen but I follow US politics closely and from where I stand you guys (democrats) will not be able to do much about the situation now, you lost and you need to wait for the next election to give it a fight. And let me tell you, people who voted for Trump in 4 years from here will feel betrailed again and will flip to the other side (yours). This situation happened before in other countries and it always have the same outcome. at least 50% of Trump promisses are populist and infaisable, if you add on top of that his lack of experience, diplomacy and his bad temper after 4 years no one will want to vote for him or any other republican.
So understanding the other side is not critical here, they will understand by them selves.
Correct me if I'm wrong here...the Brazile debate questions in question are from Democratic primary debates on March 6 and March 13, and Bernie was part of both, right?
Yup. That doesn't mean that it's not worth taking care of the easy bits first.
12GB written just opened couple of hours and haven't even listened to a single song :|
> I don't understand why you'd want to rise in Twitter.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cuplqd1XEAEre6n.jpg:large

not bad work if you can get it :)
That's genius! As it stands, if I were to vote for a 3rd party candidate then I'm essentially throwing away my vote. However, if what you suggest were in place then the risk of a meaningless vote is vastly decreased, essentially eliminated.

Why isn't it used today?
yes to all that EXCEPT internet of things (IoT)!

One word: NEST! The NEST (or Ecobee, smart HVAC etc) is eventually going to be in every house in 5+ years.

Lightbulbs, refrigerators, smart watches, CAMERAS! alarm systems, or even frameworks (Zwave etc) - (some more than others) are all taking off at a very fast pace.
> do you really think you can objectively evaluate the truth of these claims without bias?

Yes, more or less, just as many kinds of professionals are required to do the same. But regardless, my entire point is that the truth of these claims is the least important thing about them, just as the interesting question about a wager between two college students of whether a vagrant would shit his pants or not when they set him on fire is not which of them was right.

> I assume you mean the motivation is some sort of collectivist hatred or other negative feeling

I did not study psychology but history, and I'm not interested in feelings but in the distribution of power. Yes, the motivation is to justify and perpetuate a distribution of power that's favorable to the groups where those ideas are found.

> In that case, it's pretty clear that you intend this to be a mere ad-hominem attack. You simply refuse to acknowledge the possibility that a person might hold certain positive beliefs without also holding certain normative beliefs.

Not at all. When discussing the history of ideas we do not attempt to track every single person's motivations, just as I don't suppose you "refuse to acknowledge the possibility" of some black woman being smarter than some Asian man. Your beliefs -- as I hope you know -- are not only not unique at this point in time, they echo almost precisely very old and well studied ones, and thus can be and indeed have been discussed in general without attributing anything to you personally. Even in proper science (leaving aside the question of whether a certain strain of scientific racism qualifies as such or not), researchers often discuss why they're interested in a specific question (and need to justify the importance of their research in order receive grants). So the question of what motivates certain people to be interested in studying and publicly writing about any scientific topic is not only reasonable and pertinent, but a fairly common one. Even on a personal level, a scientist often needs to answer it to herself and to others.

Also, I am absolutely not attacking you, but merely pointing out that the name of the school of thought your beliefs (in this context) belong to is scientific racism. Perhaps now that you know what your philosophy is called, you can more easily find academic discussions about it if you are interested in learning more. But just as I wouldn't be able to fairly say, "people here are call me names like billionaire", after telling them I have billions in the bank regardless of my personal feelings towards the name, I don't think you get to say that people "call you racist" when it is you who present yourself as such (and not in any subtle way, or one that's open to interpretation), even though it turns out that you don't like the title.
List of Best Modern Grandfather Clock
thank you! and most people that I've spoken with that found out they are speaking with a chat bot get really, really pissed off.
That costed less than $10 billion in the end... you have several additional trillions to account for.
It isn't, but that doesn't mean that any random change will fix it. Your argument is then as follows:

1-We must do something
2-{This} is something
3-Therefore, me must do {This}

You won't find many of us arguing against the first assertion, but I don't think real numbers say that it's insurance regulation that made the prices go up: It's the fact that the risk pools are full of very sick people. While deregulation would separate the sick from the non sick, it would make sure the sick would not be able to afford insurance at all.

The ACA is working great for people that make so little they get subsidies. It's also not a problem for those of use that work at places that compensate us with well over a thousand a month worth insurance. It's the people in the middle that are in trouble: They either access the ACA unsubsidized, or work for employers that hire a lot of low paid labor, leading to godawful health insurance. I worked at places where the insurance we got was so flimsy, the ACA made it illegal: Huge deductibles, coinsurance along with lifetime maximums that made sure that if you got something bad, insurance would cut you off.

Health insurance in this country has been in an awful trend since at least the Clinton years. the ACA only helped some. We don't need a repeal, but something that subsidizes you too. Health savings accounts and insurance across state lines ain't going to help, but it's going to give us sicker people that just have access to the emergency room and go bankrupt, like in the last of the Bush years.
Even if there were no corporate taxes, the US would benefit from companies basing their business here.
Literally every politician since Newt has published their for their first 100 days..
We only expect you to make what is possible in 2 hours, and we've seen a bunch of similar exercises. It doesn't have to be poor quality, just basic. Usually the UX isn't expected to look nice at all either.
Whenever I need to find resources for anything programming related I google

"awesome WHAT_I_NEED"

find the awesome git repo and follow the links,

if I find anything interesting I search for the link on hn and reddit and try to see if there are any discussions based on the link.

profit??
Autodesk 3ds Max 2017 Crack Keygen and Product Key Full Download
How else could it be interpreted?
Not the majority, though.
A standard SV job .... in CALIFORNIA .... must restrict those agreements to things done on company time, on company equipment or suffer the whole employment agreement being invalid, severance clause or not!

Use that paid time off, or "flex" hours.

And regarding the paper trail, payments under $600 need not be reported to the IRS. 1099's only get filed after you have been paid over $600. Ask for cash.
IIRC, the 13" model with TouchBar will have four ports.
Once you apply that fix you can manually vacuum with

sqlite3 mercury.db vacuum;

from
https://sqlite.org/download.html
Ive ordered parts for a beefy Hackintosh, for 3 reasons.

The 17" MBP that had to have the logic board baked to reflow solder - took Apple 4 years to acknowledge that one.

My 15" 2013 MBPr whose battery swelled up to the point of breaking the touch pad.

New MBP announcement.

Looking forward to user upgrade-able gear for once.
(March 2011)
Unless we manage to create a parallel universe where the 11-15 million illegal immigrants are Canadian instead of Mexican, to test against, I don't think you can definitively state that support for enforcement of immigration law constitutes racism.

I don't think a person who's construction job was taken away by an under-the-table worker really cares what color the other person's skin is, the milk and bread he can't afford now leaves the same hole in his pantry.

Same thing for software development offshoring - is it racist for those out-of-work Disney engineers to want their jobs back?
Jurafaki and Martins Natural language processing is a great book covering a great deal pf topics in nlp.
Agreed.

I notice you have been downvoted. This post election shaming campaign is really making certain "democrats" look bad.

I won't attribute it to all democrats but a few people here have been behaving in what I see as a very undemocratic way over the last 24 hours.

That said, here is a protip: don't mention SJ, it just fuels the fire.
Generation 22 @ 17k points and rising. Looks perfect now?
Homelessness in Sydney/Melbourne is extremely tame compared to SF. Especially areas like The Mission. I was floored on a recent visit at how bad the problem was.
Do you guys ever get tired of Twitter stories?

Do you guys ever get tired of me pointing out that it will still be a Unicorn when it trades at 1/10th of the price and has a sustainable business model? We call those success stories, but lets be honest, its the share price you are worried about.
> If you let such a market without any regulation, there won't be a market, because the grid owner won't let anyone use its grid.

What?
I was thinking about this as well. I just learned about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact[0], which would at least cover situations (like this election) where electoral vote results that don't jive with the popular vote.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...
NYT, for one, often reiterated that Trump has no policy proposals despite many of these (e.g. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies) being out for awhile.
You cite Breitbart as an example of a website that is "less vulnerable to being co-opted or politically motivated."

How is that even remotely accurate, considering the Chairman of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, is Trump's campaign chairman?
When I first watched it, nothing changed for about 200 generations (thanks for the x5 speed up). I wanted to comment on that, but decided to reload first. Now my 12th generation is flapping for a good two minutes while im writing this comment.

It seems only the second time there was machine learning involved.
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan have been democrat in 5-6 straight elections.
But "aim for simplicity" is a good enough rule by itself, which isn't further enhanced by some "2 for 1" heuristic.

On top of that, "regulation count" is not a natural category, since one regulation can specify an arbitrary number of things. If you replace A) No smoking and B) no littering with C) No smoking or littering, have you changed anything substantive? You have not.

Regulation complexity, of course, is a natural category, but it's hard to measure before the fact and doesn't lend itself to easily-applied "follow for a guaranteed reduction" rules.
<For instance, while Census numbers can tell us how many Asian-Americans live in a particular state, they can’t reliably tell us how many Republicans, or liberals, or evangelicals are in that state.>

The first claim is a crock. They know the number of registrants for each party right down to the precinct level; it's public data.

The other two will vary greatly depending on how you define the terms.
Ever hear of tortuous interference? When one party induces another to break their contract with a third party. For as realistic as your example is (no employer is going to sue because you mowed your neighbors lawn), plenty of employers can, have and will sue when they realize you have hired away one of "their" people, regardless of your rights and theirs.

Learning of your little deal to pay them for software development work will be the stick they use to hit you with that interference suit.
No candidate received a majority. Clinton (last I checked) is on pace to win a plurality of the popular vote — and that by a pretty slim margin. But that's beside the point. None of this justifies dismissing or insulting or generalizing the opinions of nearly half of the voting population. It's just not constructive. Like it or not, you live in a society with other people. We need to be able to live and work with each other.
Yeah, I don't know how to interpret it. It's not immediately obvious to me that I'm looking at a wave and particles at the same time.
Thanks for clearing that up, it's exactly the same for me. I find technical mock interviews help.
At generation 83, a single bird emerged that successfully navigated through several hundred columns (current score 100000+) and showed no signs of failing.

It took a few dozen generations to find versions that would make it through a few columns if those columns had gaps without too much vertical distance between them. Somewhere in generation 60-70, I could see versions figuring out how to transition between heights, but failing by overshooting, or not accounting for gravity on the far side of the gap. But once it figured out how to transition between distant heights, it had something that kept working.

GIF of the successful bird: https://imgur.com/a/A0li8
Go Midwest, Young Hipster
Considering the state of audio/video conferencing, I have zero hope that virtual conferencing will ever be achievable.
Thank you, that is an enlightening article. It does mention, however, that while unlawful presence is not a crime, you can still be deported for it.
I agree the blog post wasn't professional, but there was none of that tone where it mattered, the Github issue.

I can see where his frustration stems from though, getting a response like "I don't want to unless you show me a use case" when clearly presented with a use case after spending weeks trying out someone's language can be infuriating. As I said, not very professional, but understandable imo.
It takes a lot of courage to do this, but more less now than you will ever need. You will start earning $150k a year then and then the opportunity cost might be $80-100k to go down to a junior developer. Then you have a wife, kids, mortgage, credit card loan...
I think it's pretty astounding that a customer complaint thread has run to 17 pages, direct contact on twitter, a HN story and customers going to such extreme lengths as editing their binary...

... and not one engagement from Spotify themselves on the thread. Seems like pretty poor customer support to me.
> Should I prefer Erlang as a language for its maturity and fewer constructs, it would be a pity to then miss out on new libraries or frameworks, such as Phoenix, that revolve around Elixir.

If you are just starting out and have to make a choice between elixir and erlang, go with elixir. I can't see any reason to start with erlang instead of elixir. You can use all of the erlang codebase in elixir. As a matter of fact most elixir projects call into erlang as erlang has a huge standard library. Also, elixir has nice macros which makes your code a lot DRYer.
Part of the article was about how the professionals were getting beaten to the punch by kids with smartphones.

I agree with his point that the pro camera gear should, at the very least, be better at sharing than a cheap smartphone.

No pro (or amateur?) is going to buy a camera that doesn't support SD cards for a while now anyway so your precious RAW workflow will be safe regardless, even if they finally add usable sharing options.

I am a tech nerd though, so I'm OK with it either way.
Cost of renting a small apartment (in Wellington at least) is cheaper than most U.S. tech hubs.
MIPS32
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/charlie-daniels/charlie-da...

Basically, without term limits, politics turns into a game of power plays and re-election campaigns, instead of actually representing the constituents.
You will write ‘bad code’
I don't get it, doesn't that mean that eventually you have to have tend toward zero api endpoints?
Are you basing the 50+% on the election results? Is that fair, given a voter has to coalesce all of the positions they may have on a variety of issues into a single, effectively binary choice? If you were in an eligible voter and voted in the US election, do you subscribe to all of the positions of the candidates you voted for or have ever supported?
Can FB/Twitter be somewhat effective if you've broken down a debate to tiny points, and gradually find common cause or identify real issues?

The alternative is giant blocks of text which are off-putting to many, harder to parse, hard to find time for, etc.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12892412
> libertarians only support laws that are DEFENSIVE in nature

This is key for a few reasons. By rephrasing everything from 'X is wrong because ...' to an issue of the right transgressed you're entirely sidestepping the issue of victimless crimes. Second, they're by nature proportional.

> only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do

Right, a collective is the sum of its members so it has their rights and no more.

This firmly roots all power in the individual. It's semantically incorrect to write a libertarian law allowing actions that people themselves don't have the right to perform. Again, sidestepping entirely the tyranny of the majority.

It's not perfect, but it's a far better base to start from.
People aren't good at rationality and logic. They are too abstract, so they wield abstract (read: stereotyping) tools to combat it. To successfully debate people, focus on actions and consequences that are relevant to their life, and back it up with an understanding of what their life is and evidence that these considered actions lead to undesirable consequences for them and/or others.

Debating in the abstract is something you need passion or training for. Our brains aren't built for it. Logic isn't what you need to wage debate, evidence is.
Comments are great
Wow, this was so cool. Generation 17, two birds, 18K points, still going. I wan't to learn machine learning now...
No, you've missed the lesson entirely in your zeal to appear clever and correct. That's fine, I'm sure you won't enjoy the trump presidency so the punishment is sort of built-in
Yeah I agree it's definitely a pain in the ass if you're switching networks and you have a bunch of devices already connected.

Side anecdote: It took two of my friends, a CS guy and a PhD student in MechE -- both at MIT -- thirty minutes to figure out how to set up the connection on the PhD guy's Canon so that they could send photos to a phone. I feel like they could hire two people with UI experience and drastically improve the whole system for less than a half million dollars.
India gave no warning on Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes. How are we suppose to cash in the ones we have?
Want money out of presidential politics? Make everybody run using only the presidential-campaign fund. You know, that one that you check the box on your tax return to give a couple bucks to?

As for Congress, we also already have a good fix, we just never got around to passing it. Congressional politics are full of money because the districts are too large, on average. The districts are too large because in the 50 states, with 320 million people, we have only 435 voting members in the House of Representatives.

The solution is more Representatives and smaller districts; when you don't have to run a campaign in multiple expensive markets across a broad area, you don't need as much money (and can get to know your constituents better).

And it turns out... there's a constitutional amendment for that.

Way back in 1789 when Congress met for the first time after the Constitution went into effect, they submitted twelve amendments to the states. Ten of them were ratified quickly and became what we know as the Bill of Rights. The other two were not ratified by enough states, and were mostly forgotten.

Today, it's common for Congress to put a time limit on an amendment, saying it has to be ratified within X years or it's dead. But back then they didn't do that. So in 1992 a random university student discovered one of the two "forgotten" amendments and that it was still legislatively "live" -- it would take effect if enough states ratified them. He campaigned hard and got the amendment (which says any increase in salary for members of Congress doesn't take effect until after the next House election) ratified, as the 27th amendment.

The other one is still sitting out there, and would become part of the Constitution if enough states (currently, 27) would ratify it. And it changes the formula for how many Representatives there are, and how they're apportioned. The original text of the Constitution set a cap on the size of the House of Representatives, at one Representative per 30,000 people. The apportionment amendment would raise that to 1 per 50,000, and the version passed by the Senate would require increasing the number of Representatives as the population of the US grows.

So if you want real change in Congress, campaign to get the House of Representatives enlarged. There's even already an amendment available to help you, if you can get it ratified.
Regardless of whether it is just or not, it is still the law. If it is harmful, then it should be changed.

Illegal immigrants often do not enjoy all the rights and privileges citizens of the United States do. Many underpaid, overworked, and denied benefits.

If we need more people in this country, we need to make it easy for them to come, and we need to treat them right when they arrive.
Does that take into account turnout?

What about the angle that sexism is actually a stronger driver of all this than sexist? It would certainly make the Obama->Trump conversion more explainable.
I think he knows that his voters don't care about privacy, telco mergers and stuff like that.

Where he needs to deliver is: the wall ( not literally though) making us more powerful in military and maybe a bit protectionism for US firms. And remove obamacare.

Thats it.

For the rest not done he will blame the other ( parties) not patriotic enough.

He would make America great again!

But you know! Those damn commies!
Thanks! Must have missed that one.
What is your evidence that a16z made their decision to invest in Theranos in any way differently from how they decide to invest in any other company?
I blame Starbucks.

Say what you want about holiday themed drinks, but the coffee shop, bar, and church are essentially the only mass, small-town American discussion forums. And I'd say only the first tended to really breed in-depth conversations between unlikeminded neighbors.

Coffee chains could give two shits about inspiring conversation. In fact, it's downright bad for business (at best more seating requirement, at worst danger of disagreement). So it's optimized away.
I've had a similar poor customer support.

They constantly kept redirecting me to their forums or to their FAQ's when my payment wasn't going through.

Finally I raised a support request and awaited their reply. That was a few months ago. Since I didn't hear back from them I gave my money to Google play music (even though I'm not a fan of the google play UI or the app).
Incumbents have an advantage and tend to get reelected. Term limits introduce more outsiders by kicking people out after a while.