skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I understand that people believe Trump is good for business. And I also understand that people believe Trump is good for the rich. And I also understand that people believe Trump is good for the blue-collar worker.

But I don't understand how Trump could be a good influence, in the long term, on business and the stock market, when looking at his positions and policy changes.

Why Trump isn't good for poor working class America - Assuming there's a large tax on every good coming into the country, then the cost of groceries will increase dramatically. The cost of cars will increase. The cost of consumer electronics will increase. The cost of many goods that Americans buy will increase and that will most directly affect the poor.

Why Trump isn't good for business - Many American companies source their parts from other countries. Increased tariffs and taxes impact their bottom line. Trump wants American companies to hire American and is willing to enforce it. American workers have a higher minimum wage. This also affects the bottom line.

Why Trump isn't good for the rich - If businesses are impacted then investments should decline, but if you've seen The Big Short, then it's possible that we could just have a fraudulent, unpredictable market instead. The huge tax cut should also benefit the rich, so actually, Trump does seem great for the rich.

All in all, I'd like to hear what others think and why this sort of thought isn't widely circulated.
100% GTFO. Don't burn yourself out. The business people have obviously fucked up in this equation. Developers are literally the absolute last step in the process of building software.

If they fuck up at this step then the planning part was basically non-existent.

If anything GTFO and read up on how business works so you know where you are on the foodchain and how it's not your fault for wanting to leave before it hits prod.
You are jumping to the conclusion that any removal of property rights intrinsically and automatically removes peoples ability to make use of property.

That is a direct parallel to the entire point of the "property is theft" argument: that strict enforcement of property rights is a limitation on peoples ability to make use of property, by monopolising use of it.

You can destroy the ability to make use of property by going too far either way.

A good example of how carveouts can increase the ability of people to make use of property and improve their ability to provide for themselves is the Scandinavian "freedom to roam": In Norway anyone can use "outland" - areas that are not part of urban settlement. Owning the land gives you a monopoly on certain users (e.g. you will own hunting rights and forestry rights, for example) but far fewer than most other places.

Apart from providing liberty in the form of being able to go where we want without having to ask permission of land owners, for centuries this has been an important means for people to help provide for themselves: Nobody can deny you the ability to e.g. pick berries or mushrooms, or let your sheep graze, for example. It provides a substantial increase in utility of land that would often see substantially less use, and makes a lot of people able to be independent and work for themselves instead of someone else. That is one way it can increase liberty.
So much has been written about this in the past. The American political system is mainly geared to certain professions.

Why Don’t Americans Elect Scientists?: https://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/why-dont-...

Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists: https://singularityhub.com/2011/05/17/eight-out-of-chinas-to...

Scientists and engineers cannot simply give up their positions for several years and then easily return to their industries, and not just academia like the article points out. Professions such as lawyers have it easier in that regard.
This is about as audacious as the great wall of Mexico. In mastering Trumponomics, Musk has demonstrated himself to be a quick study.

He announced 'The Boring Company' on Twitter a day after the inaugral Trump-tech billionaires meeting in Novemeber, and the announcement fell flat in every corner of the internet I peruse, in spite of Musk's rabid fanbase. People thought it was a joke. It's apparently less of a joke now.
Pre-property rights, I have the freedom to walk and inhabit any space I want.

Post-property rights, I no longer have the freedom to walk and inhabit any space I want. I can't walk into your living room and stay there. I can't sleep in your bed. Your "right to own property" has severely curtailed my ability to move freely about the world. Men with guns will come after me if I don't leave your bedroom.

Your "private property" has imprisoned me into a tiny rabbit warren of publicly-owned spaces.
Theft implies concept of ownership exist. Proudhons says ownership imples theft. Its just useless nonsense.

So my point was not that if something is accepted in society ==> Its right. There is no such thing as right/wrong/moral/etc. Its about consistencies in the contracts we humans sign with each other.
And we are arguing that it's not relevant. Men are treated differently in our society, dicks have a different connotation, etc. This is a great example of how simple metaphors strip important nuance.
I think the complaint here (if I understand you correctly) is that you are giving a vacation day and then making a certain day mandatory to use it. This practice is common among companies and extremely infuriating and in my opinion should be illegal. Better to have 35 days paid and make december 22nd a company holiday.
This is why Hacker News needs a downvote button. This is a non-story. The DJIA is an average of 30 stocks. Even if it was possible to figure out causation of stock market movement, the DJIA would be a terrible indicator of stock market movement.

For more, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average
electric means less ventilation needed

Ventilation isn't just for exhaust fumes, it's also needed for fire fighting. A tunnel geared for self-driving electric fans won't make much of a difference there (look at subway tunnels for example).
A few bad apples. The kids who don't care spoil the opportunities of the kids who do. The two need completely different support systems -- kids who don't care need to be monitored, kids who do need opportunities. As a finite example: they canceled the "electives" at my school (students could sign up for a 2x/week lecture on an eclectic subject) because a lot of the kids figured out they were the easiest to skip.
You can read about it here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304743
Can you define "work" in this instance?

For example, if they made half the kids do better, and half the kids do worse, does that count as working? While you sometimes get claims that it's for their own good that less academically inclined pupils are sent to the non-grammar schools, I'd guess the same people who say this would freak right the hell out if their own kid failed the exam and didn't get in, which kind of undermines that argument.
This. I grew up in Texas, first in a small suburb that had its own school system (elementary through 7th) and then as a part of the greater Dallas school system, in another city (8th through graduation).

My original school system was always trying to push me forward; they placed me in gifted programs, encouraged me to compete in academic competitions (you know the ones I'm talking about), and often recommended to my parents that I should be allowed to skip a couple of grades.

Conversely, my latter school system, in an attempt to meet standards and retain order (I assume), simply taught down to the lowest denominator. As a result, I lost a lot of the drive and motivation previously impressed upon me. It's only after growing up that I've gotten some of that back, however, I doubt it will ever reach its previous high.

So, as unemotional as it may seem, there should be a mechanism for either removing those at the bottom in order to accelerate their learning and return them back to the general population, or a similar mechanism to allow the higher levels to avoid decline.
I was speaking to someone the other day who has recently retired, and it took him 25ish years of working at a large company to get 5 weeks of vacation time :/

I think many people should get vacation time more quickly, or it should be a standard of five weeks just like the Netherlands.
Discussed two days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13462865
Remember that people get used to the environment. People who live in the Bay Area don't care about the Golden Gate Bridge for example.
> Why is it scaremongering?

This is actually a mildly subtle point, which is why people who don't 'get it' are so immediately dismissive. There's nothing wrong with providing more information to consumers. Hell every product we sell could come with small book's worth of information about its chemical contents, health risks, place of origin, worker conditions which could be considered valuable to the buyer. The question is why this specific piece of information is being fought for so hard. And that's because there's a movement that vehemently opposes GMOs and are trying to use labeling to scare people into avoiding (what their opponents say is) a completely safe product.

I'm not a scientist so I'm not qualified to evaluate the various and contradictory studies about the risks or non-risks of GMO foods. However, this battle should be taking place in labs and the FDA. Using labeling and the fact that GMO sounds scary to hurt GMO producers is the definition of anti-science FUD. It's not anti-science in the sense that the movement disagrees with a widely held scientific consensus but that they are using psychological and political tricks to subvert the actual scientific process.

> We're told if it's kosher.

This is not a government requirement, there are committees of jews that evaluate if a product is kosher or not and allow their seal to be placed on the packaging. Jewish families will even have a preference for which committees they trust.
Who's bragging?
In Spain the word populism has turned into an insult that traditional political parties use freely against new political parties even if the statements are perfectly legit (e.g. universal basic income). Is this happening in other countries too?
Kosher labelling is not mandatory. Mandating that all foods be either labelled as KOSHER or NON-KOSHER would be a better example, and something I hope nobody would support.

Producers should be free to add any of these labels to their products, but mandating that all products are labelled in regard to GMOs when there's no evidence that GMOs have any proven impact on health or the nutrition of the food does border on scaremongering.
>>The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person.
>Anyone who would say this with a straight face isn't intelligent or isn't honest, so they can't speak for intelligent honest people.

I think this is meant in the context of most sciences. If you're a physicist, your work is sufficiently apolitical that you can see both parties as reasonable. If you're an epidemiologist, or a cancer researcher, or a developmental biologist, you see more examples where one political party has asserted themselves as better arbiters of fact than the science. And that political party is the Republican party.

In terms of politics in general, both "left" and "right" have plenty of individuals that deny fact and scienec, but only one party has put those people in charge of the party and the party platform.
Time in the market is better than trying to time the market.

How long until next crash? When is the crash over and things start to climb again? You cannot know before after the fact, so it ends up being a big gamble. I'd say invest now, possibly over a few months if you want to spread the risk.
I am kind of the opposite. I have been struggling to find anything outside of a tester job for the past decade. I have almost zero motivation to continue. Will probably bail on tech very soon.

Happiness only comes in the form of cooking for me so maybe something a kitchen.
Also, on the way down during landing, the capsule let in external air once external air pressure was larger than internal. This way they avoided having oxygen at atmospheric pressure inside at that time.
It reminds me of something Asimov wrote -- scientists are used to inflexible facts and not flexible people -- that might make scientists either unelectable or imcompetent.

OTOH, I pulled this gem from an Asimov quote website -- "[Creationists] make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
For people who doubt the effectiveness of calling: start small, and work your way up. Local politicians are far more easy to influence than people think. I've known a lot of people who've worked in the office's of state senators or state representatives, and it's not uncommon practice to just count the number of phone calls for and against when deciding an issue.

EDIT: I should note I don't know much about the article's point on calling vs. emailing. Even emailing a local politician is probably effective. Just take any amount of time to contact your local representatives, and you'll put your issues ahead of 90% of the constituency.
... and traffic is still horrible.

Compared to pre-big dig days? It's not even close. Boston traffic has mostly normal rush hour periods now. I can get from Somerville to Braintree in 30 minutes during peak periods. That same trip could have taken 60-90 minutes during the elevated artery days. It was often faster to take 128 and go around Boston to get from the north shore to the south shore rather than take 93 though Boston.
I don't remotely follow the logic you're applying here. I did not suggest anywhere that these students feel resentment to their sources of financial support, but rather that highlighting class divisions in a university will breed resentful attitudes among students towards each other. Do poor students somehow owe something to wealthier ones just for attending the same school? Please describe in clear terms exactly what kind of logic you're applying here because to me it mostly seems like something an undergrad with a swiss watch would be boistering about in the dining hall.

Did you somehow get the impression I think grad students should be resentful towards the university because of their stipends? I think most of them are grateful - I meant to convey that it's disingenuous to think of a grad student's stipend as some kind of handout, I really can't understand how you interpreted that as you did.
It's partly the job, partly the country I think. For example, I only get 2 days off (paid) when my daughter was born. My wife gets about 6 weeks. We complain it's unnatural for a woman to work while she should still properly breast feed and complain that I'm needed at home badly now. We look jealously to Finland where they get more than 100 days, even when you are self-employed and men get over 10 weeks off. All paid. Yeah, taxes I know but also, less stress.
Nah, just people connecting that sentiment with other statements. It should be cleared up since it's causing some mass confusion.

It's funny because I preface it by saying "Remember that it's a matter of opinion" (and, well, the title alone) and people come out of the woodwork completely disregarding this, or outright misinterpreting sections of it.

I maintain that a large reader base here does not actually... read.
> Most of their reason for hating guns fall on "they're scary". That's not scientific.

Well, only if the fear was unfounded. Your analysis seems a little shallow there.
That's great. I wish we could figure out how to change the culture in general though. Some cultures in the world value smarts. USA culture generally does not
This would be true in a crowded marketplace driven primarily by sales.
I never understood this line of reasoning, as if regulations were some extrinsic property.

"I'll take one quart of regulations, a three feet of rules"

It doesn't work that way. The practice of regulation is non-linear in terms of its formulation and result. Long, complicated regulations could be relatively meaningless, while short rules could be really important.

Saying we are going to cut 75% of regulations is useless. Point to specific rules and regulations.
> The way you describe your experience with Scala makes me think you only had a very superficial look at it.

I worked with it daily for 2 years and also took Odersky's Coursera courses on Scala. I liked it more than Java (7), though I find the syntax aesthetically offensive (and I realize that's subjective). Ada (I worked in an Ada shop for 3 years before moving to the JVM) managed to have a robust type system without introducing the sort of syntax wtf-ness that Scala seems to need.

I actually recommended against using Scala at a later job simply because I thought the learning curve would be beyond most of the people I was working with (I didn't phrase it quite like that when mgmt asked me for my opinion, of course). Learning to write idiomatic Scala takes time. In that regard it's an expensive language to use unless you hire folks who already have experience with it.

As far as Clojure's dynamic typing goes, you can use libraries like plumatic/schema to add some checking where you need it (interfaces, etc), and for whatever reason I tend to have less trouble (as far as runtime type issues go) with Clojure than I do with Python or Ruby.

But hey, no language is perfect. I kind of wish Haskell clicked for me the way LISP seems to, since on paper it seems to check all the boxes -- but I just can't seem to get very proficient with it (or I'm just not willing to invest the time at this point).
Show HN: Most Used SDKs in the Top 200 iOS and Android Apps
And you would probably also not describe that one as "reasonable", which is one of the criteria.
I've found it really useful. You can quickly play with an API to understand the corner cases, and it's often quicker than looking through the docs.
>Mobile support, you can't easily write a mobile application in Python.

Depends on your needs, but there is at least Kivy.
Do you really think that students openly supporting a candidate running for a Democratic nomination who was further left than Hillary is really against the Democratic party? They wanted someone else to be the nominee, but it's not like they were voting Republican.
Westray to Papa Westray flight
You just described why so many people support school choice and voucher policies. It is absolutely mind boggling to me how anyone can consider more options to be worse than a one size fits all model.

EDIT: In keeping with the trend, took about 30 seconds to get downvoted.
Shouldn't you put the spoiler warning before the spoiler?
It does not need to be Samantha Bee's job to win everybody over.
But from what I recall, the syntax is terse by design - this is not inherently bad, though. In other mainstream languages, you have to go out of your way to write obtuse code (e.g, code golf).

I'm guessing that best way to address this issue is through liberal use of explanatory comments.
It's more that he's pro-business-he-likes. If you happen to be a company focused on renewable energy or nuclear fusion he's likely to side with old energy companies and try to throw as many regulatory hurdles in front of your ventures to ensure his friends win. All in the name of free market capitalism of course (/s).
GDDR5 can typically do 240GB/s access time on a typical GPU, and there are multiple chips on many cards (Tesla K80). The newer cards use HBM2 and can do 732GB/s (http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla-p100.html).
You can't run for office and only have an opinion on three issues. If you want to be a leader, you need a clearly stated position on every issue.
Key words: past two decades.

I remember the days before their descent to this insanity.
> Life starts at conception

Isn't that scientific fact? The zygote is not viable, but it is in fact a living instance of Homo sapiens sapiens. So scientifically, life begins at conception.

Now saying that life begins at conception, does not mean that abortion should be illegal. There are legal and philosophical arguments based on privacy and bodily autonomy that say it should be legal.

However, this illustrates an important point. Because you wanted to support a political point, you embraced a scientifically incorrect idea. This is not much different than the climate change denialists.
Right to freedom is not your birth right. Its society given.
These look amazing, and some really high profile projects as well (Asterisk, Audacity, Eclipse, LLVM, Mercurial, Git, GDB, MediaWiki, etc). Thanks for that! I wish there were more books like these.
In my opinion, if the people who work with someone consider them incompetent, they likely are. I would even go so far to say that the opinion of coworkers might be the best predictor of someone's competence, better than any "objective" measure.

At least if the people you're asking are themselves competent in the skill they are judging (asking the dev team whether someone is good at sales might not be predictive).
Many people also buy the additional 12 days (this is comparable to unpaid leave.) The collective working agreement of my company also allows for 3 months of unpaid (to be combine with max 6 weeks of paid) leave starting last year.
Amazon Steals Netflix’s Spotlight to Become Toast of Hollywood
It takes a long time for economies to correct to a President's actions- on the order of years. It's better to judge a President's effect on the economy at the end of their tenure than at the beginning.

It's also been shown that the President has less affect on the economy than people's perception would have them to believe.
Exactly the same thinking as mine. And what the liberals are doing? Whining more racism and continuing the same agenda.