skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That sounds quite similar to what we're doing!

Would love to see a blog post to compare experiences..

(Speaking of blogposts.. that was somewhere on the todo list..)
This entire initiative to filter/incentivize certain content in response to the "fake news" issue itself means picking a side. In my view, "fake news" isn't a real thing. It's a propaganda term cooked up by left-leaning media organizations (some of which were directly colluding with the Democratic party) to discredit any news that does not fit their narrative. Facebook addressing this in any way means they have picked a side in this political issue.

Now you can disagree with me on the reality of "fake news" but you cannot disagree that it is a political issue pushed mainly by left/liberal organizations and the dem party (later backfired because trump snatched it away from them), and facebook is legitimizing their argument by saying "yes, we realize that this is a thing and we will do something about it."
I have added information on top of the main page about the affiliation links, I hope that will be clear enough for most people :)
Precisely. You can pitch Sears as "Lampert lined his own pockets with buybacks, then tried to salvage the damage done" or "Lampert was a moron who implemented bad policies". The truth appears to be some combination - he seemed to genuinely think stock buybacks were better than capital investment, and thought his lean-and-mean interbranch competition would produce savings.

What you can't do is argue that Sears is the product of actually efficient markets. Lampert selected for brutal, Randian techniques even when they were far less rewarding than taking a decent, eusocial approach. It's like cargo cult capitalism - he saw that sometimes successful businesses harm people, and decided that if he just harmed enough people he'd have a successful business.
and you're suggesting we shut up and keep quiet when we KNOW we are RIGHT? That is not going to happen. Submitting to tantrums only makes those people get stronger.
Etsy is another company with extraordinarily talented writers. Their engineering blog "CodeAsCraft"[0] is superb and I invariably learn something everytime I read it.

[0] https://codeascraft.com/
WW3 IS ON ITS WAY, GIVE US OUR GUNS AND WE BRITS WILL END IT
I found this extremely interesting but one thing I think is important to remember: it's possible that Republicans will take down Trump in 2020 (or sooner), but it's more likely that non-Republicans will. Mobilizing and organizing support among the left and independents would be more than enough to win a Presidential or any other election in the US outside of DEEPLY Republican areas.

Looking forward opportunities to win over tepid Trump supporters is one strategy, but don't let anyone convince you it's the only strategy (or even the best one).
If your "ideas" are in conflict with facts, get better ideas.
The problem is that what interests you now may not be economically valuable next year. They want you there past one project, because the future is too murky to guarantee your current role will continue to be needed.

Google et. al. are hiring generalists because they want people of a mindset such that when the entire special-purpose they hired them for dissolves, they're willing and eager to ramp up on a new project and new challenges instead of saying "Well, the foo project is closing down and foo's pretty much what I wanted to do, so I guess I'm going to quit (and take all the knowledge and skills Google spent time and money to train me up on with me)."
I presume you are referring to states that omit or downplay evolution in history textbooks.
Evolution, vaccination, global warming, coal, etc, etc
There's nothing wrong with trying to maximize your earning in doing what you do. If you want to have the greatest good on the world, you do what Zuckerberg does: make a shit ton of money and then give it all away to the best charities or greatest need (or at least plan to).

It's not a case of greed winning over good will. The number of entrepreneurs and businesses doing good in the world isn't limited by the will to do so - I'm sure you can find countless wannabee business and entrepreuneurs trying to make a positive impact. The limiting factors are barriers to entry: legal, political and marketing.

The greatest problems of our times aren't technical: they're political and legal.
I really like RedHat's Paas, Openshift.
As a person on the left, when you look at the left you see your bubble. That is, you see the people you are already agreeing with, the nice people. However, when you look at the right, you see the controversy; the things most visible in the mainstream are the ones that are most talked about, are the loudest and most divisive ones. Your point of view is not symmetrical.

I suspect the right-leaning people in this thread would say the same thing in reverse.
sure, I trust one party to have the keys to everything... /s
I think you'd be surprised. It's not an "us vs them" situation, most of us have some frivolous outlet to go along with our real interests. I skim trashy magazines when they are around, and I watch the latest blockbusters each summer.

None of this stops me from also watching 'prestige television' or keeping up-to-date with current events. People like Jon Stewart and Jon Oliver have managed to bridge the divide between news and entertainment, and I don't see why social media should be any different.
If you like anagrams and a bit of a challenge, you should check out https://twitter.com/anagramdaily
Fingerprinting Firefox users with cached intermediate CA certificates
Because .NET Core even with the .NET Standard 2.0 only covers part of the APIs for CLI and Web applications, and only targets GNU/Linux, OS X and Windows.

Java is a complete platform, not only CLI and Web, has application servers like Websphere that offer a full server OS abstraction across the cluster and run in several flavours of enterprise grade UNIX and mainframes, not only GNU/Linux.

Also every database worth using in the enterprise space has JDBC drivers, whereas good luck getting ADO.NET drivers or mainframe connectors for .NET Core on those platforms.

And many of the .NET libraries don't run out of the box on either Mono or .NET Core, so unless they get ported, they won't be available.

Oh, and as far as I am aware you still don't get performance monitoring tooling like the JetBrain products talking to .NET Core.

Also they have legions of replaceable programmers used to Java, unless the IT department changes their infrastructure and spends money in trainings, it won't happen, even if .NET Core already had feature parity with Java.
Polite phrasing that doesn't immediately condemn the subject but instead tries to get them to slowly consider alternative points of view works better with almost all people.
My first guess would be to attempt an operation that only works if the device is rooted.
If ranger and cmus run I will sadly be living in Windows alot more.
General immigration reform along these lines is what's needed:

http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-optimal-number...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/29/opinions/making-legal-immigrat...

Because the current system is really broken: see what it's like to try and immigrate, legally, from Mexico if you just want to do manual labor.
One thing I used to do was check if the hosts file had been modified, or something like that.

I had conditional paths for showing ads, and some rooted phones had blocked ads based on IP address.
Who will buy the burgers? This point seems so obvious, it's almost an axiom -

if (unemployment >= 0.5) {
sales = sales * 0.5;
}

People point to previous paradigm shifts and "mass unemployment didn't happen then". But what if this time is different?

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Is it better to be the CEO of McDonalds in a post-scarcity world with UBI (paying high marginal tax rates), or the head warlord in your own personal Mogadishu?
>The reason is that to have automatic differentiation one

>needs to keep in principle the epsilon^n for any order and

>the dual number just take epsilon^2 = 0 which is an strong

>limitation.

Actually not. Differentiation in an abstract sense is the change of the function, approximated linearly. This means: when you do normal differentiation, you basically do already throw away the squared terms. The Leibniz notation for a differentiated function df/dx is really explicit about this principle - as opposed to the Newton notation f'(x).

What these people call dual numbers automatic differentiation is a really powerful tool. In a more abstract sense, having an object and adding a small epsilon to it, allows you differentiate much more general objects. For instance I could ask: how does a function S[f] of a function change with respect to a function f. I know this sounds like abstract non-sense but you can for example calculate the curve of a rope with it by solving dS[f] = 0 to f.

>limit(x->0) (sin(x) - 1) / x = 1

>just by doing x = epsilon

No, that's not the case. If you use the L'Hospital rules, you throw away the epsilon (it's constant) and the derivatives of both enumerator and denominator don't change. Thus the two limits stay the same.
A relevant question here seems to be whether people can realize the difference between criticism and a personal attack.

It seems very common that people can't even talk about systems of inequality because simply mentioning that the status quo is unequal is often viewed as more taboo than actually perpetuating the inequality. e.g., there's no sexism in tech.

For example, when identifying institutional racism or sexism, one can be as scientific with data, but it seems that the mere act of suggesting that inequality even exists is painted as a personal attack.

Being pointed to inequality doesn't necessitate that the individual must assume that they're being attacked.

If someone tells me something, it can often mean that the mere fact they're talking to me at all is that they hope I have the capacity to self-examine and change. There isn't much reason to talk if they didn't think I would change at all. It's up to me if I want to construe it at an attack or an opportunity for learning.

Just like the election, it seems that the standard that each political side is held to is not at parity. Certainly, Hillary lacks charisma however, Trump's offenses and career have been, by a reasonable measure, more egregious than Hillary's; the bar she was held to seemed much higher during the election, yet it seemed there was nothing Trump couldn't do and still be elected. It seems that the disparity of expectations is somewhat generalizable to the larger political groups they represent.

From an outside perspective, the American right can perpetuate inequality, but the American left is barely allowed to talk about inequality.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13697666 :)
I'm curious to whether the Democrats will ever come to terms with reality here, or will they just double down and continue the blame game?

I've been following. They're doubling down on the Russia conspiracy theories, identity politics, alluding to Trump being Hitler. The party is in shambles, philosophically speaking. It's a shame. It's also ironic that Trump has pictures of President Andrew Jackson(D) in his office.
Neoliberal globalization is precisely the free movement of capital and goods and services to exploit opportunities created by restrictions on the movement of people (whether as consumers or as labor).

Movement of people (labor) at the behest of capital (but not freely on their own)—e.g., various employer-sponsored work visas—is often part of that.
I think your point about insurance premiums is spot on.

A $100-200/month increase isn't much when you live in a high cost of living area with higher salaries, but when you live in a low cost of living area with lower salaries, that $100-200/month might be a huge percentage change in your monthly expenditures.

People who are on employee-sponsored health plans don't understand how expensive healthcare is for low-income self-employed and low-income self-insured people.
William F. Buckley's idea of what constitutes liberal leaning is hardly any kind of gold standard. Bear in mind that no real left wing policies or media platforms exist in the US, it's right vs. far right. The Economist is considered a left-wing organ here.
https://images.nvidia.com/content/pdf/kepler/Tesla-K80-Board...

"The board is designed for a maximum input power consumption of 300 W"

So one hour at home:

Power used: 300 Wh

Price: $0.20/kWh

Total cost: $0.06/hour

Google cost: $0.70

You could say it's 10X more expensive, but you need to include all additional costs, power is just a fraction of it. The GPU itself is $5k, which over - let's say - 3 years would cost $5/day, or $0.20/hour, and if you're using it a third of the time, just that amounts to $0.60/hour. Add everything else (you might use less than 1/3 of the time) and it would be far more expensive than using it in the cloud. As it is expected to be.
The brightest, furthest pulsar in the universe
I'm not the parent commentor, but they may be referring to the fact that HN pulled all political topics for a week a while ago.
Yes, and the point of this is what, exactly?
The other downside of that is: in 18 months they're going to hassle you for an interview again, whether you want one or not.

I have a friend who was interviewed at Google, rejected, then interviewed again a year later, rejected again, and then a year later a Google recruiter got in touch to see if they'd like another interview. They said it started to feel like a cruel joke.
Considering how much flack the Democrats got for shutting down Bernie's campaign with questionable means, that was a close-run thing.
What's so strange is that over and over I hear comments about Islam (from the President, no less), comments about BLM and many, many comments about women working.

What's striking is the nature of these comments. Recently the Utah GOP chairman wrote a letter arguing that woman shouldn't work, that they belong in the home and this is what's "best for everybody." He was forced to resign. [1]

I wonder is this the sort of thing you're talking about?

> If you question the dogma of social justice, you will be lynched on social media and branded a bigot, a racist, a sexist, and so on.

Did you ever consider that maybe the people nobly questioning the dogma actually are bigots, racists and sexists?

Honestly that would jive much more with the evidence from Sam's experiment. And if this is the case then there's simply two deeply incompatible value systems at work here. The idea that people might have a some sort of reasonable discussion about whether women should be allowed to work or whether BLM is protesting "appropriately" while cops murder citizens with impunity is kinda... dumb?

[1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/...
Making fun of people is not a good way to learn about them or work with them. We all learn this in grade school, but we seem to forget it when we talk on Twitter or on TV. If your presupposition before entering a conversation is that the other side is crazy or stupid, you're not going to achieve any sort of real communication.
I am using ConEmu, so that works. Thanks!
Great for someone like you or me who know not to trust everything you read on facebook. Not so great for my 60yo dad who still believes pretty much everything he sees online, and doubly so when he reads it on facebook because it was a "forward" from someone he trusts.

This is a complex question and there are no easy answers.
While that's true, I think the two don't compare in terms of degree. Trump's off-the-cuff speech (or answers to questions I saw the other day in a press conference) is drastically different to something a speech writer would create. I don't think that's the case with Obama, or a raft of world leaders.

As a parallel, I know very little about programming. But I could have a ghost writer create a book that I would endorse by agreeing with the general premise (let's say it was a "learn Python from the start the right way" book), and a book of the same quality could have been ghost written for one of the many incredibly talented people on here. The quality of the books would be similar, but if you asked them or me anything about programming, you'd get a good answer from them, and a complete pile of old tosh from me!
> He supported a guy publicly!

...You can't just talk about the abstract notion of "supporting" "a guy". A specific thing happened, not the generalized notion of "publicly supporting a candidate".

Is he not subject to criticism for his political positions? Where exactly is the line? How should someone be challenged to change their positions?
Here is the answer:

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/TZ-Variab...

The third format looks like this:

:characters

Each operating system interprets this format differently; in the GNU C
Library, characters is the name of a file which describes the time zone.

The other formats specify the timezone directly, such as EST+5EDT. Interestingly, it seems to work okay without the colon. Perhaps the leading slash implies a filename?
Awesome, thank you guys!
You forgot crime rates, taxation relative to other developed countries, the causes of the Civil War, and whether there really are footprints on the Moon.
YC W17 Launch: Hogaru, Elemeno Health, Playment, Hivy, and Bulk MRO
Incidentally I have trans friends who voted for Trump because they are more concerned about 2A than about Pence (most of the LGBTQ fear of Trump is around Pence, I think.)
> I moved to San Francisco from a rural town, and I would feel 10x more comfortable sharing my liberal viewpoints in a small, deeply-red town than I would insinuating something anything less than 100% left-leaning at work here.

Maybe because in the latter case you're at work, as opposed to talking to folks in the neighborhood at home?

EDIT: lol, I'm posting a reply to a comment talking about ideological intolerance and shutting down of discussion, and my post is downvoted with no explanation. :) ROTFL "It's the other side who are always doing this", for sure. Yeah.
Funny, nobody has yet suggested what these well grounded counterfactuals are. And I don't mean vague "freedom of speech on campus" discussions. I'd like to hear about some really well-grounded counterfactuals that are being shouted down.
I'm not sure I buy that distinction. Do you believe that experimental physicists know every single formula and can recite it off the top of their head? Because unless they use those formulas constantly in their work, they end up having to look them up.

Same thing with algorithms like tree traversal. You should know the theory behind them, but unless you regularly implement them, there is zero reason to commit their implementation to memory to the extent that you can casually write them on the white board during an interview.

>>And aside from that, let's face it, none of us here are Einsteins.

Even more reason to not try to memorize something unless you use it constantly.
Thanks for sharing. Can you elaborate on #1. I never really understood the level of hatred Hillary received. To me she seemed like any other politician.
Capitalism is supposed to cannibalize itself.
Oh man, that's a way bigger question.

I suppose I can exempt my statement by saying "within the confines of the economic and political landscape, people are hired and paid as a mutually beneficial exchange". That way we escape the larger question of whether the exchange is actually enough to sustain people.

But yeah, there's a more interesting and unnerving point to be discussed there. My assumption is that you're talking about various indirect subsidies that keep people above water (even things like subsidizing roads at the expense of non-drivers so people can drive to work). I largely agree, but I'd be curious if you're talking about something deeper than that?
>> We are unwelcoming to people who are factually wrong.

This comes up from time to time here on HN. I don't buy the whole CO2->Global Warming->Catastrophe thing, and I regularly get down votes here if I try to make arguments to the contrary - even science based arguments. I think a lot of people on the left try to hide behind some kind of false consensus as to what is "better", "morally superior", or "factually correct".
What's even more humiliating is how (apparently) indifferent — or even accepting — parts of the tech community and Silicon Valley are of this development. (See all the "it's PC culture's fault" in this thread and elsewhere.) It's overwhelmingly obvious that we're in deep shit. Regardless of their beliefs and politics, people who self-label as "smart" should be fucking livid.
They are illegal because the system is so broken. There's a market demand for those people, and they're moving here to work, by and large.

Just because something is set in law does not make it morally right.
I didn't say it gave an accurate impression of his personal ideas, I said that reading it would help people understand his appeal, since it convinced many of his supporters.

It's usually a mistake to focus too much on the personal limitations of the front man. Like assuming that because Robert Plant wasn't a good guitar player, Led Zeppelin must not be a good band. It's better to understand the ideas in the book (and campaign generally) as belonging to his team, which includes intellectuals who do read books and have very clear ideas. Some of them are now policymakers in the administration, so those ideas will affect our future whether or not Trump came up with them.
Don't think this is a US specific problem unfortunately.

Attack ads? Seem to be growing in popularity over here in the UK. Atrocious bills are being swept under the rug here too. And if the Brexit situation taught us anything, it's that the political scene here is very much an 'us vs them' situation too.

Either way, I suspect these trends are (sadly) becoming more and more normalised across almost all societies and countries now. The US might seem more extreme here, but the general pattern does seem to be getting more common elsewhere too.
Why are those the extremely important topics that need discussion? What about the people who are actually being hurt every day in America (drug addicts, prisoners, trans people, poor people...)?
I used to enjoy giving interviews because it was fun coming up with these little problems, and discussing them with smart people. Because I didn't otherwise get to do that very often at work! But I felt guilty about giving a false impression to interviewees about what the work actually involved...
Sorry for being off-topic: can you guys consider introducing something similar to AWS's free tier? It doesn't have to have a lot free resources but it should be lengthy (6+ months, ideally at least 1 year). I recently started a new project, and while I'd prefer to use GC, I had to go with AWS because they offer one year for free (and GC's 2 months is not nearly enough to validate an idea).
I spent a summer working for some very conservative business owners. They asked me what I felt about the great society program during Johnson. I said that I thought it was a fine program that lifted a lot of people out of poverty.

The following day they presented me a framed photo of Joseph Stalin.

It's not just liberals that can be closed minded.
Thanks Sam, this was an illuminating read.

I am very anti-Trump, but I don't (nor do those in my circle) think that his election somehow makes ~50% of the country racist, stupid, etc. Clearly, though, the impression is that I am of this opinion.

Conversely, I'd like to think that none of those interviewed thought that I was a weak idiot for voting for Obama, even though those sentiments were palpable at the time.

It's a good reminder that it doesn't take many loud, angry voices to poison the dialog.