skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
See that's the thing, first blue collar, then white collar and eventually the entire economy is gutted to serve the rich who really don't care where the live as long as it's nice and they can remain rich.

All a result of successive trade agreements that destabilize both economies involved to cater to the elite few on both sides.

Think: That "giant sucking sound" crossed with Niemoller.
I think food is something people have a lot of their identity tied up in.

I'm a mealsquares man myself but all for something like Soylent or something becoming popular and cheap.
I don't know where you get your facts from, but the way the world sees the Clintons (whether corrupt or not) is as "expedient, better work with them, good things might come out of it." The way the world sees Trump is "what the fuck? This guy used to be a reality TV star in a program that didn't really make it outside of the US? What? He also says all this bizarre things?"

If you thought American image around the world was at its lowest it could reach during GWB's presidency, oh boy you are in for a surprise.
7 aspects of our lives revolutionized by fin-tech
>Laws cannot change what people think and how they feel, so without absolute control laws cannot prevent people from treating one another poorly.

If only virtually every single instance of social progress in this country didn't show the opposite...

Go look at charts showing public opinion about LGBT folk and gay marriage and see what happened in June of 2015.

Or look at acceptance of blacks in American society after forced integration, particularly of the military.

Or look at the acceptance of womens' suffrage before and after it was made legal.

Also, I'd like to hear a direct answer to this question: You don't think our Vice President supporting electro-shock therapy for gay teens is a bad thing that has real impacts?
Maybe. You're right that it's very possible that we are effectively getting President Pence with Trump as his spokesman. Trump and Pence did seem to disagree on a bunch of things though when the debates were going on, so I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

If Trump does try to actually do anything drastic, I think he will find his hands tied though.
>Whether it is for economic reasons or just plain bigotry is something for the sociologists to study and not something I can pontificate on.

In the context of the economic literature that exists in mainstream academia, which is in overwhelming support of globalism as a policy which supports economic growth of all people, it appears your comment strongly suggests anti-globalism is equated with bigotry.

I'm neither defending nor supporting globalism: is it reasonable to conclude that someone who is not in support of globalism is a bigot or racist? This seems to have more to do with political correctness and I think all people deserve the right to have a thoughtful discussion and represent their views without being effectively silenced, and when something is labelled as bigotry or racism it is effectively outlawed in western culture. Shouldn't we be more careful here?
I think the "uncertain and complex world" trope is a part of the problem here.

I have become very cynical over time about the way intellectuals, academics, trade negotiators, politicians and the media use/abuse complexity to get their own way. Many times when I examine an issue I see a whole lot of people saying how complex the world is, how impossibly nuanced it is and .... the kicker .... therefore you shouldn't attempt to figure it out or have an opinion. You should just do whatever the "experts" recommend even if it's apparently unintuitive or even quite clearly against your own interests. Anyone who doesn't obey this line is written off as ignorant, too stupid to have a vote, etc.

Yet are these issues really so complicated? Often they are not. The complexity, when you take the time to tackle it, ends up being largely artificial.
Using 'racist' in the context of criticizing Republicans is just name-calling. Bush displayed no open racism, bullied no one, and was not xenophobic. Same for Romney. Yet the anti-Trump language is just a more hysterical version of the anti-Bush and anti-Romney language.

At some point the term "racist" came to mean "insufficiently left wing". This happened because left wing types called every Republican "raaacciiiiist" - like a bored shepherd boy yelling "wolf" for amusement and likes on social media.

How's that working out?
>It is the fault of the enemy religion

I don't like where this is going.
What is it you can't stand? Nothing concrete has happened yet. Maybe this doesn't apply to you but it's interesting to see how a number of celebrities with massive resources (from my point of view) which effectively enable them to insulate themselves from almost any changes which a new government might introduce, have promised to flee the country.
Well, me and my friends have different experiences then.
No, she's definitely as much or as little corrupt as any other politician.

And yes, your second point is spot on. which is the problem. The electorate focused on emails and assumed content of those emails for months, and ignored 400 problems with Trump.

It wasn't a painless choice, but the correct choice sure as hell was obvious to anyone trying.
How will Trump attempt to earn it? And who pays the price?
I was really impressed with her performance in the debates. She must have unbelievable self-control. Her baggage isn't even her own baggage; people have been attacking and hating her for decades, apparently only for having the gall to be an ambitious woman in politics, while being married to a successful man in politics.
So the wall will be built?
To be fair, money in presidential elections typically just buys exposure. In a ceaseless chase for ratings, every media source for the past two years has shown every Trump speech and event live and in whole. Even with her stash, Trump saw more airtime than Hillary.
>Because the salaries of US-based programmers would rise? Because companies would be more motivated to train locals instead of importing foreigners?

Or it just speeds up outsourcing.
But American culture is not homogeneous. The platform on which Trump ran seemed to elevate certain parts of American culture while dismissing others.

More important to his success - it seems to me as an outside observer - were his promises to do things that are not possible but sound appealing to voters. Reopen mines, open factories that will offer many jobs to low skilled workers, and so on, to build a symbolically protectionist wall without paying for its construction.
Who is going to attack Australia? What military threats do they face?
Yea it did, she will probably take the popular vote. It was the state polls that were the problem.
For the peaceful coexistence of Russia and USA, do you think it is better, if the leaders are friendly or hostile to each other?
Americans are humans and humans are tribal.

Many previously Democrat voters switched to Trump, but without a heavy base of reliable Republican voters the swing voters that supposedly decide elections, on their own, wouldn't have decided anything.
And this is what you get when you eviscerate education budgets and remove things like civics and government from the classroom, or make it AP-only.

The awesome part is that since I can't legally vote, I get to point at the rest of you and act like I'm George Carlin for the next four years. Brace yourselves.
But that was never the conversation. It was always about how only bigots and deplorables could support him. The concerns powering Trump's rise were shooed away as small-minded. Well, Brexit and Trump are two black eyes.

I really hope the Left tune in to the grievances of the majority now, because I'm fearful of what comes next if they don't.
Polls were off because 1- they're used as an instrument of manipulation to steer the undecided in the "right" direction and 2- as long as telling your opinion might result in violence against you or your property you will never have sincere answers.

As an exterior observer (I'm French living in France) I thought it was "strange" that Clinton's campaign communication sounded scared since she was supposed to win hands down.
Let’s talk about CFI: clang edition
Yup. I actually think the world is ripe for the return of city-states. The advantages of nation-states have fallen in importance, while their disadvantages have become increasingly clear.

Just look at the success of Singapore to see how effective a modern city-state can be. London, New York, San Francisco, etc. would all be better off as independent self-governing city-states.
> Age shouldn't be the only criteria to allow someone in voting process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test
eh..that has less to do with funding and more to do with the First Past the Post system. Look at Australia's order of preference with instant run-off (you literally can't throw your vote away; plus voting is mandatory. There's a fine if you don't at least pretend to cast a valid ballot) or New Zealand's MMP. Both are a lot better at representing the public in parliament.

The US system was actively designed to not be democratic. That's why we have an electoral college; the vote was (and still is) the peasants suggestion box.
> had the media tripping over themselves to give him free coverage.

Media treated people as idiots, in some cases CNN went to levels of stupidity and lies that would have put Fox to shame. They thought they were helping their candidate, but they were actually hurting the cause.

The fact that many Democrats have voted for Trump doesn't mean Trump is great necessarily, it means they really hated Hillary and what she represented (and no, not because she is a woman, if anything this will always be remembered as step-back for woman as a US president, people will remember Hillary and cringe next time).
That's what you get with a Democratic "leader" such as Hillary Clinton. She inspired no one to come to vote. Most of those that voted for her did it so Trump doesn't win. But voting against someone rather than for someone is almost always a losing strategy, proved once again today.
You're just reminded of propaganda.
This post starts off with an abstract goal - "use a custom type as a dict key", and then goes off down a rabbit hole trying to create typeclasses and make it work. This is despite prior knowledge that Elm has chosen not to implement type classes.

The line from Evan, Elm's creator, has always been along the lines of "show me a concrete actual use-case that you can't do without typeclasses", this article fails to clear that fairly low bar.

The other elm article from the other day about select boxes did a much better job of identifying that not having a way to enumerate Enum types is a bit annoying.
Affordable care act will likely be repealed. That will affect a good deal of us.

EPA may lose funding. The world will begin feeling that in about a decade.

Department of education will likely lose funding. The US will lose the STEM race to India and China. We'll feel that in about 20 years.
Yes, this has been observed many times here in Europe. People that come to a new culture they hated suddenly find themselves in a spot where the food and culture from the homecountry is more important than it ever was when they lived back home. Even germans start importing stuff to Sweden because that sausage they always hated back home is so much better than anything they can buy here in Sweden. And people that never cooked before start searching for ways to recreate the tastes from grandmas cooking.

People from cultures that wear something over the head does so much more in the new country while the home country is starting to loosen up. Even though this is exactly why they moved away in the first place.

(We have friends from Somalia, Germany, Turkey, Russia, Egypt and then some, that describe this for us)
It's only been about a century since the Great Depression and the World Wars. I think it's a little early to say tragic outcomes are off the table now.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing -- but Trump actually got less than Romney did in 2012 among white voters.

Race is certainly a part of this election, like it is all elections in the USA, but not all.
> What are you afraid of? Christmas? Accidentally going to mass?

Bombing abortion clinics? Protestors holding signs saying "God hates fags". Systemic child abuse?
WTF happened in the last 6 hours? Oh f*ck!
To be honest, the anti-immigration right hold up Australia as a model for an immigration system as a rhetorical tool rather than an explicit model because (i) it's a prosperous liberal democratic country that can't be glibly dismissed and (ii) there's widespread public perception that it's unusually hostile to the idea of accepting immigrants and doesn't let many in.

Of course the reality is that Australia lets in far more migrants per capita than the UK, but that's certainly not the objective. There are people on the anti-immigration right that want to see more skills discrimination in visa awards but are quite happy with the overall numbers arriving every year and are entirely comfortable with the idea of a large percentage of the UK population being born overseas, but they're definitely a minority.
> Surprisingly, namecalling doesn't sway votes.

Looks like it did. Trump was easily the biggest name-caller, and got rewarded for it every time.
Yes, "might" was the most important word in my post and that was intentional. I personally don't fall into any of the groups listed and demographically most of the people reading this probably don't either. We are the lucky ones. We don't personally face the risks of a "might". If you fall into those groups that "might" starts looking awfully scary regardless of the exact odds.
Sanders fully understood what was going on with the voting base. He got that the middle class is upset and wants the national priorities focused back on improving the American standard of living, not on nation building / war / foreign meddling / boosting globalist policies, et al.

Hillary on the other hand is a classic globalist, backed by Wall Street and an endless parade of billionaires. She was the establishment in an anti-establishment election.
Guess Palantir can look forward to a few new juicy government contracts
That's the only way to possibly bring the conflict to a close. If we just leave Syria now it will create a major opportunity for Russia.

But not committing overwhelming force to Syria will ensure we never leave.
Democracy started off as an oligarchy of the nobles, then extended to free white men/citizens, then to women and then to every citizen. While it was idealistic, I suspect the people who designed the system did not expect large participation; usually the only participants would be city folk/wealthy landowners etc. who probably more or less held similar worldviews. Now, technology/media has made it very easy for many more people to participate in a democracy, and we have to deal with the uncomfortable situation that this gives a lot of power to people who may not be well educated; in fact, who might be rather shallow/easily influenced...

Anyways, I don't think democracy itself is the problem; it is the Establishment that has mostly lost touch with some of the things that Americans respect. A common criticism of Hillary was that she wasn't a straight shooter like Trump. Let's think about that: Hillary was a career politician, a First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State, all diplomatic positions that require her to be, well, diplomatic. Obama did well because he could actually pull off both: be a straight-shooter in public, yet diplomatic when talking to other politicians. Hillary unfortunately did not have that skill, of public oration. That is probably what hurt her most.

Now I agree its rather unfair to discount Hillary for that reason. But the reality is: that is how US politics seem to work. And politicians need to understand that fact.
Please. Sanders would have played Trump in the debates like a fiddle. Trump can shout "he's a socialist!" over and over again all he want, but he wouldn't have any of his ammunition like he did against Clinton - the emails, the speeches, etc.
A real validation happens when people start using your app. Better yet, paying you for it.

You can discard 100% of what your friends and family say - they are not in the business of crushing your dreams.

Release your app, install basic analytics so that you know how many people are using it. Put a price on it to see if people are willing to pay for it.

Full time job is not an impediment to working on your app. Yes, it's going to be harder, but I wrote lots of code and shipped a couple of apps while working full time.

As to when to quit - it mostly depends on your level of optimism and willingness to take risks.

Personally, I would wait until I have a steadily growing number of users for the app.
Amusing that Sarkozy has rebranded his UNP to "Les Républicains". GOP should be flattered.
I'm a third-generation American, with family that immigrated from Eastern Europe in the 1900s to escape anti-semitism. I'm Jewish, my wife isn't. Her family is Scottish, English and German. She had a Cuban-American step dad. Our wedding was equal parts Jewish, Cuban, and White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. A conga line and the Hava Nagila... why not?

We've lived in towns big and small, in FL, GA, CA, and NC. We have families all over the US. Relatives who are millionaires and relatives who live in trailer parks.

It goes w/o saying that our respective families have very different ideas of the American experience.

Besides our differing families, because this is a country of immigrants, every place I visit in the U.S. is a bit different. Even within NC we can't even agree on a single style of BBQ. At the state fair the other day, I had a Cuban egg-roll (the innards of a Cuban sandwich deep fried inside a Chinese egg-roll ... genius!)

I recently learned that literally within the Koreatown portion of L.A. has sprung up a Little Bangladesh. And you know what, those immigrants will only contribute to the great melting pot that is America.

So I'm really at a loss to describe a single American culture, much less one that is under threat from today's immigrants.

I'm reminded of this clip from Bridge of Spies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qI3SngYvUg

That, that to me, is what unites us. Not some abstract ill-defined concept of "American Culture".
> And see how the republican base and party reacted.

They reacted the exact same way any political party would react against their opponent.

> Or the country didn't feel it could express its racism until Trump gave it a bullhorn and an endorsement

sure they could have, by not voting for him (Obama)
Smart people escalate the war in the middle east like Hillary?
Just to be fair, Nate Silver predicted both this and the Cubs back on May 10th in a joke:

"Reminder: Cubs will win the World Series and, in exchange, President Trump will be elected 8 days later."

https://twitter.com/natesilver538/status/730251094614528000
Would you like to know how a normal person gets to vote for Trump?

I'm a male French, in France, and I intend to vote FN (extreme right). I have higer education, 10 years of experience in programming, including 5 in 3 different countries. I have social values, like companies should take care of the humans behind the employee, and we should give our maximum to include everyone who wants to be included. I turned my back on leftist movements because no matter how generous I was (e.g. thousands donated to charities, >1200hrs of volunteering, engaged in social causes, etc), leftists always find a way to depict me as a spoiled child with rich parents, and they dismiss any good work I've made as a result of luck.

Oh and my 8-year old cousin was raped by an Arab teenager – I still don't know whether that's due to probability or whether he identifies to the Arabs-against-whites cause. It did change a lot for me.

So now that I'm freed from liberal shamers, I've decided to vote depending on only one criteria. In my whole professional experience, promotions were given to women, to the point that it was unfair to me; In my whole life women have been bitter to me. I'm pretty satisfied that there are currently hundreds of laws in favour of women which offset any inequality they can claim; The only party which proposes to keep those existing laws and not adding new ones is FN, the extreme-right French party.

All in all, what you need to gain back someone like me is love. Give me luck with finding a girlfriend, give me a fair treatment at work, recognize my social engagement and the positive parts of my values, stop assuming all my rationale is just raw racism or raw machism, stop assuming I've just been lucky with work, and you'll get me back among the centrist voters.

But as long as it's not possible to expose my problems without hearing generalizations and shaming, I'll keep voting FN.
In this case the popular result is very likely the opposite of what you assert. That is, Clinton will probably win the popular vote and lose the presidency.

So popular sentiment is actually in support of an open, connected world. The political structures in the US systematically oppress this majority, due to its concentration in cities and the legacy of a voting system that respects territory over people.
He will serve no one but himself, just as he has his entire life.
Maybe you should have picked up a better candidate. Losing against Trump is the real shame here. Hillary was just bad, Trump won by default.
iOS and Android UX guides have completely different approaches to the logic of user interaction. AFAIK, Xamarin does not allow to have different layouts generated from shared code. So, even that components are native, their placement is alien.
Same thing in germany: you won't get a hospital to use this, ever. Selling to hospitals is enterprise sales ^10 - we see sales cycles between 3 to 8 years (that is from initial lead to project delivery).

It might have a chance in developing countries with less regulation in place.
With the GOP controlling both Congress and the Presidency, and a luddite POTUS, encryption, digital privacy, and net neutrality are all in danger.
CA has the advantage of geography - any invading army would have to cross the steep side of the Sierras. These have relatively few passes, most at high altitude and all easily defended against an invading army. It's actually easier to invade CA via Tijuana than overland through the U.S.

They also have the advantage of being exceptionally technically advanced - perhaps moreso than the U.S. military, given that Lockheed has a large presence in the Bay Area and all the Predator drones are made in San Diego. And they're a nuclear power - Livermore is one of two sites that actually develops atomic bombs.

This'd be fun to wargame out as a board game or computer simulation, although the subject matter is a little macabre.