skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Higher education costs expanded to absorb the extra money from the student loans thrown at them

That's because they're catastrophically stupid industry-specific interest rate subsidies. A dollar for tuition is then less expensive than a dollar for anything else, so everyone conspires to buy things with the cheap government money that isn't available when used for anything else. And that process is highly inefficient because it's basically a huge implicit fraud scheme to redirect subsidized student loan money to things that aren't strictly education, which no one can admit to out loud or explicitly negotiate for because it's illegal to use the money for that. Then it's, look how expensive "education" has become!

A UBI doesn't do that because it doesn't restrict what you can use the money for.

> healthcare costs increased as more consumers started competing for a fixed supply of appointment slots, hospital beds and medical services.

In part this is the same thing (here is a huge pile of money that you can only use for healthcare, now everyone go swamp the doctor's office at the same time). And the rest of it is temporary because no one knew the law was coming ahead of time so now we need some time to increase the supply of healthcare providers.
You need a really big group of people to make that happen, because there will be failure cases at every stage of the process. In fact, you might even need an entire country to buy in.

Which is basically a description of what happens when countries provide free uni education...
I do the same, but with a Nexus card; never been searched, but I always declare what I'm bringing across.
Mind sharing where you live?
actually, that in an of itself, is a good question. Name all the moderately price mid-engine sports cars on the market.
There's too much red tape.
I think the use case is people browsing your site in a coffee shop. They wouldn't shout their password for everyone in the room to hear, but that's exactly what their computer's doing. Yeah, probably nobody overhearing the password is going to use their account to start posting embarrassing nonsense. But it's good for their user agent to inform them that that could happen.

State-sponsored actors aren't going to try to brute-force the encryption so they can post to your aquarium forum, that's true.
There appears to be a recent reliability problem with the Trident. There seem to have been at least two failures in the past 35 launches.

Lockheed often issues press releases after successful tests. Up until 2012, with the 135th, all of their press releases talked about the "XXXth consecutive successful launch." Starting in 2012 with the 137th, they all say "the XXXth successful launch." I take this to mean that #136 was unsuccessful. Their latest release talks about the 161st successful launch.
I understand what you are saying but I personally don't think any amount of interviewing will ever tell me exactly how much value an employee will give me in the next year.

[Serious] Do you think this is possible? I can think of no way except to put them on a 3 month contract to see what they are really worth and I don't think that is what candidates are looking for.
ARP poisoning[1]. Ettercap lets you do it with a couple of clicks, without any advanced knowledge.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARP_spoofing
Not clear to me what the problem is with your current setup?

Let's Encrypt is happy to issue for (almost) any Fully Qualified Domain Name in the Internet DNS, and no-ip.org is on the Public Suffix List, so you won't be sharing your rate limit with other people.

If your ISP prohibits incoming connections on ports 80 and 443, so that you can't prove control over the FQDN that way, you can use DNS as proof, check out https://acme.sh/ for a client that has a lot of dynamic DNS users getting Let's Encrypt certificates this way.
Where do you see the issue? Creating a certificate that no one else has to trust seems pretty easy already.
PS4 Pro's Missing 4K Blu-Ray Drive: The Mistake Sony Had to Make
On that last note, you may be interested in reading https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/29/the-r...
> crack-cocaine sentencing converges with that of methamphetamine [...] would you have preferred for the response to be weaker?

For users? YES! (in both cases)

> There's nothing intrinsic in someone's skin color or ethnic background that would cause someone to not have a valid ID

Just like there's nothing intrinsic in skin color or ethnic background for higher crime rates. Yet due to economic/social factors, the rates vary in both cases. Generally the lower household income, the higher percentage of no-ID. Which maps onto races as expected.

http://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERIC...
The scope of that surveillance should be kept in check though. Search warrants seem reasonable to me (assuming the process of obtaining a warrant is somewhat restrictive) but broad unchecked surveillance isn't reasonable to me.

Giving a government too much access and control seems bad for both the government and the people.
I think that's because the authors are pro psychologists, all of whom long ago accepted as dogma that clinical psychology CAN make a difference in thinking/behavior, especially in reducing neuroses. While this change for the better usually isn't described as "changing your personality", to most non-pro-psychologists, it could be.

I suspect it's just a matter of how much change, and how the change manifests. If one of the classic attributes of personality is sustainably reset to a different level, like trust or sharing or kindness, I'd certainly consider that personality to be changed. I haven't read the article, but that may be what it proposes.
> For one thing, it reduces the incentives for someone to work hard.

If you work harder, you will still have more money - that's what % is about.

> Some people (maybe justifiably) feel very uncomfortable with the idea of selling their own future equity.

If they have a problem with that, then they should negate something like "40% for every gross dollar over 1000 per month". You are

> Also it felt really unfair to high wage earners that they were sometimes paying multiples of what their tuition originally was.

That's why I wrote "coworkers", so that it is not a "poor workers against big bank" scheme but "poor workers invest in one of their peer" - this is a lot more at eye level. If the coworkers agree to less - fine. If you are more on the social side: Why not simply invest the, say, 40% into financing the education of the next "poor worker"?
>In here, and I don't believe the rest of the world can be that much different, the overwhelming majority of people with their basic needs covered by the state dedicate themselves to a routine of TV, social media and other social rituals of all kinds, all devoid of intellectual pursuit.

So what? Why is the purpose of other people's lives to serve your idea of nobility?
Between the inauguration and living in DC, all anyone can talk about lately is politics. So I've had the opportunity to probe a bunch of mainstream Democrats on this issue. The overwhelming response has been not caring (though many are more worried now that Trump is in the charge of the surveillance apparatus rather than Obama). Even to the extent people care, nobody cares enough to want to spend limited political capital on the issue. To the extent policy is necessarily subject to political compromise, privacy doesn't seem to even make the top 10 of issues Democrats are willing to fight for.

It seems inevitable to me that the same generation that willingly hands over all their personal information to Google and Facebook, and sees government mostly as a positive force for enforcing civil rights and increasing social equality will embrace the expansion of the surveillance state.
Plugging phones using USB is a potential security nightmare. QI's style chargers (if were more widespread on phones) would be better for that.

And I bet that companies making those kind of phones would win big if they drop those chargers on buses for free.
I made a similar response below but how can any amount of interviewing give me anything but a vague notion of the amount of value they will provide the company over the next twelve months.

I assume that their previous employer, who had them working there for years, is a much better judge of value they can provide. So if I am offering more than that, I don't see how I am not valuing the candidate.
So, US taxpayers gave out $20Billion for nothin. Electronic records, but no common APIs or formats or hope for interoperability.

I still demand paper records for all medical stuff. I carry them around to any doctors. I can still read paper records from my childhood. I can't read digital documents that are 5 years old in some cases.
I found my mentor through my first paid web development job. The experience is absolutely worth it. That experience happened almost 10 years ago and I still catch up with him every so often.

I have been a mentor in the past (and present) and there is immense value it brings to me and the organization I am employed by.

Depending on what you are looking to gain from the relationship, I would recommend watching some C live coding streams or finding meetups for that in your area. You could also find some LinkedIn groups and reach out for a coffee/google hangout to start the process.
so, how do we prevent the extinction of the Orlando Purple-Crested Taintsnorter?
Elon Musk says to expect “major” Tesla hardware revisions almost annually
I'm thinking more that employing such circumvention for your own purposes would be hard to argue against, but publishing it publicly may not actually be defensible under U.S. law, even with the fair use exemption.

I think if I were thinking of publishing something like this I'd look at the outcome of lawsuits such as those surrounding the old DeCSS code (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_City_Studios,_Inc._v...). I'm in the U.S. so for me something like this would be relevant.

For those elsewhere there may still be issues as DMCA is the U.S. implementation of the WIPO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO_Copyright_Treaty), so there may be issues elsewhere, too.
How happy will your customers be when they find out that you're just pulling the wool over their eyes instead of doing your job?
From a sustaining Sun's business perspective, it would have been a very poor fit. Sun had hardware product development as a principle effort, a variety of support channels and organizations for hardware and software, professional services, marketing, technical and executive sales etc. Basically many things Google is anemic at. In a way, Google kind of hacked the requirements expected of a business and it sort of works for many of the products they offer, but you can see where they totally flop with the Motorola acquisition and other ventures like Google Fiber. This stuff is hard, and it's really hard to find people that really care and have the ability to execute instead of simply being "qualified"

From a talent and technology acquisition perspective, it would have been absolutely sage. Sun hardware folks could have shifted away from general purpose CPUs to switching and packet processing. OpenSolaris was a tour de force, especially with a legitimate hindsight comparison to where Linux was at the time. If they could have cherry-picked parts of Sun and shed the sustaining business around storage, commercial Solaris, SPARC etc that would have been ideal.
I get that but a lot of people are questioning any surveillance.
> (If you’re wondering what data the NSA collects, its own site[1] offers a list and this statement: “The standard operating procedure for the Domestic Surveillance Directorate is to ‘collect all available information from all available sources all the time, every time, always.’”)

The linked site is a PARODY. There is no such thing as the Domestic Surveillance Directorate, that would be the FBI. How the author of this article fell for that, I don't know.

[1] https://nsa.gov1.info/data/
Volume operator
Yes. Every website. Because if only the sensitive sites are strongly encrypted, then bad actors and authorities know exactly where to focus their efforts in trying to steal information. When everyone is strongly encrypted, attackers are stretched much more thinly.

Besides, it's easy and free these days. Unless, apparently, you use some crappy shared hosting provider. Get a VPS, man! They're cheap!
Ask HN: Can someone explain this pg tweet to me?
The tweet is: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/823304393273573383

"One of the most interesting places to look for new ideas are the edge cases where deeply ingrained desires are mistaken."

"Could you provide an example Paul?"

"The desire for software to be efficient."
We can take turns naming even more expensive high rises, but the goal is to show that increase in high rises leads to drastic overall decrease in cost of living. Manhattan, in theory, should be dirt cheap as far as $/sq.ft. due to massive supply, and it's not. Neither is Singapore or Shanghai. There's a natural price floor for such buildings, and it's not yet competitive with pricing on cheaper options, such as suburban detached, suburban attached or mobile homes.

Pending a discovery of cheaper construction materials or methods we probably won't see massively cheaper high rises.
>If implemented, it will surely be a disaster in America (DOA - Dead on Arrival), considering how well African Americans have worked and abused the Food Stamps system.

KKK out of HN!
Nit picking: "voila". Viola is the string instrument bigger than a violin.
Agree, SF is awesome for kids, at least until school age (not that it's bad for school-age, I just personally have no experience with that yet) - it's almost always nice out so they never get stuck inside, and there are tons of programs and things to do.
Is he saying that people think they want software to be efficient, but they actually want software that solves problems, and therefore you can find good ideas in making software that solves problems? I'm pretty sure I still haven't interpreted it correctly.
AMEND TITLE XVIII OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
I was talking about colistin's legitimate use in the United States. Even absent its over-use in China, it's still decently common.
Hi guys! I'm Kevin his brother, joining the conversation here. If you've got some feedback, please let us know!
Thank you for the links. I am currently reading them, and will try to apply the information gleaned.
I don't use yelp anymore, all the places around me google reviews seems to become more and more popular. Instantly I get nice photos, hours, directions, and just as quality of reviews. The best thing, sometimes a direct link to the menu. Show times are much better than going to fandango etc. I want to spend less time on my phone navigating sites and more time giving options to my wife or friend who's traveling with me
One key distinction might be that Best Buy doesn't appear to be an open marketplace. Best Buy has to purchase from the maker, to sell, whereas app marketplaces do not purchase, they just make available. I don't know if that has any standing in court, but it's important that we recognize that the brick and mortar comparison does fail to completely encapsulate what we're talking about.
No, I don't see the difference, because people crossing the U.S. border simply don't have any right to decline searches:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception
I prefer octobass.
Then that's a bug you should report, and let the Chrome team fix it.
When Republicans talk about supporting innovation and removing "burdensome regulations", and this is the kind of protectionist agenda they support, it's clear they have no real interest in true innovation. They merely want to protect the antiquated business models of sluggish industries that actually refuse to innovate. Real innovation is difficult, it requires revolutionary thinking, and the coal industry certainly doesn't want to think too hard about changing their business. They just want to extract more coal cheaply and sell it at the same profit. Because they refuse to innovate, they are threatened by competitors who have invested in renewables and made progress such that their prices are now close to fossil fuels.

Why don't Republicans champion the innovation of the renewables industry? If they truly cared about innovation they would, but it's clear that they hide behind this rhetoric only to protect their powerful lobbyist friends.
i don't know what you want me to tell you? we have ~400 clients and they're not boutique shops either.
Partially, it's also that anyone strongly opposed to surveillance realistically can't get elected to high office. If you oppose the intelligence agencies, they have access to the data necessary to ruin you by leaking that your running mate had ECT or someone similar.
It's an interesting point of view, but I'm not sure I agree with the underlying argument. Specifically, I have not seen the free software environment stagnating at all. If anything I have seen it accelerating fairly consistently since I first became aware of it in 1985. There was a time when I was forbidden from using free software in my day job. Now I am encouraged to use it. How far we have come.

This point of idealism comes up a lot and I think it's something of a red herring. Keep in mind that the FSF's goal is singular - to promote software freedom. It is not idealism to hold to that mission. It is their only purpose for existence.

Let me give you a real world example of why a mixed scenario is not realistic. My wife has an Android phone that she bought from the phone company. It is on version 5.02. There is a bug in that version of Android where a log file fills up and the phone refuses to connect to WIFI connections that have had a lot of activity. This bug has been fixed for a long time in the Android code base. The code base is open source. I can inspect it, compile it, etc, etc. I can see the bug. I can see the fix. But I can't load the fix on the phone because the phone is locked. I can't even get root on the phone. I can't fix the problem. The vendor has told me that since the phone is 2 years old (2 years!) that no updates will be forthcoming and I should buy a new phone.

The problem is that no matter how free a piece of software is, it is really only as free as the environment in which it runs. We have seen over and over again, that companies will collude to ensure that their interests trump that of the user. A world in which free software exists only as an extension of non-free software is a world in which it is marginalised to the point where software freedom is lost entirely.

It is not idealism that prevents software freedom from working well in organisations that do not want software freedom.

Where I agree with you is that we have a long way to go to allow users to connect the dots between the problems they have as consumers and the protection that software freedom affords. My own wife thinks it is completely reasonable to spend $1000 replacing a perfectly good phone simply because the vendor wishes it. Somewhat unusually, this is a consumer movement held dear by developers, but virtually unknown to the consumers it seeks to protect. This is clearly a problem. However, we won't fix that problem by abandoning the purpose of the movement. Will my next phone be an open source phone that denies me software freedom, or a proprietary phone that denies me software freedom? Does it matter?
> and sees government mostly as a positive force for enforcing civil rights and increasing social equality will embrace the expansion of the surveillance state.

This isn't unique to the generation you talk about.
Net neutrality by encryption seems like a much better idea than government imposed NN. It's optional and not one size fits all.

Let's encrypt all the things!
Or would every router get its own certificate? But then netgear would have to become its own CA.

Why? They could just partner with an existing CA, like Cloudflare does with Comodo.

And how would DNS hijacking be an issue? The attacker wouldn't be able to produce a valid cert anyway (the router would come with a custom burned-in key that it would use to authenticate itself to the CA and get the cert).
I have tried that type of system in a Thrustmaster model http://www.thrustmaster.com/en_US/products/tflight-hotas-4 (click on media to go to the gallery, the rudder "rocker" is visible in the 3rd-last and 2nd-last picture, on the back of the throttle).

I have to admit that it is slightly better than twisting the stick, but still nowhere near the accuracy of actual rudder pedals.
Samsung: Note 7 battery design, manufacturing caused fires
First, "Europe banned antibiotics" is a massive oversimplification, and ignores that similar steps are being taken in the U.S.

Second, while the European bans are doing good things, it's far from perfect: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2016/10/eu-report... . Use of fluoroquinolones, macrolides and polymixins (including colistin) rose - Europe is weirdly fond of it.
If you read the paper, you will notice that Micron is the worst here.
That's not what he said though. Specific quote: (you can find many sources)

> They’re bringing drugs. They’re bring crime. They’re rapists… And some, I assume, are good people.

Which is a much stronger claim than what you wrote.

> Is that untrue? If it is true, should we be letting them in?

It's true that some people moved from country X to country Y and committed crime Z, for almost any chosen X, Y, Z. Yes, US should be letting people in. Just as other countries should be letting Americans in.

We don't have ability to read minds and predict the future. The best alternative you have is past statistics and unless you've got statistics that show rape is a really disproportionate between country X and the US, (and even that needs a lot of context besides numbers) this claim is just repeating bad stereotypes.

Or in case you want a specific example that works the other way: "Americans are child murderers (just look at school shootings) and drug abusers (look at number of jailed for drugs) and some, I assume, are good people. Other countries shouldn't let Americans in if they don't want those problems."
In the managerial culture no one really cares about the rules, because they don't think the rules apply to them because they are not doing anything wrong and they are privileged. They understand that some people in the country are not privileged and those rules are for "them", not for "us".

The only way to make them change their minds is if a lot of them become targets of the control apparatus and in liberal democracies that never happens. Democrats are afraid that Republicans are going to use the apparatus on them and vice versa. No one cares about the rule of law.

In fact privilege has nothing to do with your actions, it has to do with who you are in relation to the government and those in power. Privilege can't really be taken away by new laws. Privilege can't even be given by new laws. Because the laws don't apply to those with privilege. It's possible to get privilege by doing what those in power want you to do and that's mostly act as they want you to act on their terms. Privilege is about power and control. It's nothing to be guilty about, because it's not something you did. It was something that was done for you.
When Obama says that Snowden created serious security implications, do you think that's from a point of privilege, or simply placing ideology over practicality? Based on everything I know, both Obama and Snowden appear to be fairly authentic characters. It seems weird that they would have opposing view points. If we're to assume the best ideals are forged though intelligent reasoning and debate, shouldn't they have both concluded the same? Glenn Greenwald has proven himself to be less than authentic at times. If I could pass a criticism Snowden's way, it was who he went to, not what he did. Am I wrong to feel this way?
I think of it like herd immunity. Users typically reuse passwords between sites, so if leaches the passwords out of the aquarium forum they may get their Gmail password as well, etc.