skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wrote a snarky if apt comment, but I'll rephrase it seriously.

I hope the resources put in limbo by this can be devoted to investigating and reporting some independent and accurate accounts of what's happening.

Such as, say, refuting every false statement that is coming from the press room podium.

I'd pay for that paper.
E2EMail is a simple Chrome app – a Gmail client that exchanges OpenPGP mail
Comparing Swedish/Danish/English in the vocab:

http://wordbank.stanford.edu/analyses?name=vocab_norms

Seems like data sample is too small to infer anything useful for Swedish.. but comparing Danish and English is interesting. Seems like Danes outperform or English kids underperform. Would be interesting to understand what the major driver is for the effect.
so what? why should he give any airtime to a media company that has blatantly slandered him, propagated toxic vitriol, and vehemently opposed him?
You're right, I do lean towards agreeing with the author of the blog post. However, I wasn't (and am still not) in any way certain, and didn't want to be one of those asses you see on the internet who turn everything into a religious war. So I just put the information out there because I (in my ignorance) thought it was useful information from which intelligent people could draw their own conclusions.

Honestly, I don't care a great deal about string handling in Python and just wanted to inject (what I thought was) more information into the discussion. I'm kinda regretting that now. Lesson learned: steer clear and leave it to the experts.

I'm curious, how does Go handle strings?
The device that will replace the Heimlich manuever
areyousure?

im kidding, but seriously thats a really interesting article/event - what search terms did you use, or did you have prior knowledge of that incident?
Interesting example there, because if you apply traffic shaping against video streaming you either force it to reduce quality or ruin it completely.

What everyone is worried about is that ISPs will threaten to "shape" Netflix traffic unless Netflix pay them - straightforward extortion. Or zero-rate Facebook traffic while counting use of independent non-Facebook news sources against users' quotas.
> If you said the same thing about hispanic bisexual women, would that be socially acceptable?

Your PC censorship won't work on this forum. It doesn't matter if it's "socially acceptable" as long as it's true. It's true that it's white, straight men that are generally privileged and ignorant here, and (speaking as a non-white straight man) it's relevant, because the way you're ignorant about things is not having to care about them. I'm much more aware of how my race affects how I interact with the world than about how my gender does.
What comments? Why? In what regard are they "fake"?
Show HN: Brokeflix – website that aggregates all free streaming movies
He thinks of himself a dictator and is banning all of the papers who keep outing his administration scandals and Russia ties.

The more he goes on Twitter blaming the FBI and the NYT of leaking fake info, the more true it most likely is.

He didn't fire Flynn because the NYT pulled some random story out of their ass.
You got the distance wrong. The minimum distance the two planets can have on their orbits is 55 million km. The force between the two is of the order 1e15 N.
The melting was prior to about 1960, with the strongest melting during the World War I. During the wars, German-speaking communities switched fully to English. Everybody was expected to conform to a universal American culture, and most of them proudly did so.

Had the melting pot not grown cold, we'd have a lot less internal conflict today.
> For anything other than a dedicated "business class" circuit with hard performance guarantees, speculation and shaping is involved in delivering the end product.

The alternative to a connection with a SLA guarantee is a best effort connection, not discriminatory traffic shaping. Underprovisioning part of your network doesn't require you to show favoritism to certain traffic—the normal way to cope with larger than expected usage is to just start dropping packets where there's congestion. That doesn't imply or require traffic shaping.
"Stealing"? Vladimir let Donald borrow the book and make photocopies, and he's happy to explain all the parts that are not clear.
>Just think back to why you studied computer science or coding. I hope it wasn't to help build spy tools on your friends & families.

So what do you think of all the people working at Google, Facebook, and Microsoft? All of them are spying on everyone too.

Countless software engineers work in the web space, where much of the money for continued operation comes from advertising, which these days includes tracking and spyware.

Honestly, can you point me to anything in Silicon Valley or the tech industry that's actually an ethical business?

And even if you find someplace that isn't involved in spying, you get places like Uber where sexual harassment of female employees is encouraged and promoted.

AFAICT, if you're worried about doing work that doesn't compromise your morals in any way, and really does contribute positively to society somehow, you'll have to do something like avionics work: low-level code to make critical devices work as safely as possible. But even this has descended a lot from the military realm, so I don't think that's really safe either. You could also work on space probes, but that's a problem too because those are all built by defense contractors and research organizations that get most of their revenue from the DoD. Maybe the automotive sector.
I know several people who are highly involved with the FCC, telecom industry, and telecom law that think that "network neutrality" is just 2 words. Until 1970, and only because of lawsuits, it was illegal to connect anything to your phone line. You could get any phone you wanted from Ma Bell as long as it was black.[0] If you wanted a different color you had to pay extra. It took force to make Ma Bell and the FCC allow you to plug in your own phone, your own computer, etc. The FCC supports monopolies, if you want competition you should applaud the deregulation of telecom.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_500_telephone#Ownership_...
Comcast is/should be willing to spend the net present value of their future revenue streams to defend their monopoly. Ditto AT&T, Verizon, etc. The combined market cap of these companies is a pretty big lobbying bill to pay even for Apple, let alone Netflix. Google tried just building a competitive network but apparently they didn't have the stomach to combine network construction with lobbying at the necessary scale.
It's based on several scripts from Github. A lot of lines are just regex and lists (apps, services, tasks) of things to disable or remove.

I recommend you do your own script by choosing what you want from each type of script. I would release my script if I was sure it wouldn't break random people's computers, because IT WILL. I'm also running Windows 10 enterprise because I want as little telemetry and things shoved up my ass as possible.

Some Windows updates can change registry keys or disable certain policies. I monitor the commit log of other repos to know what I need to update, but they don't always cover everything. Feels like a lot of work but it's actually not.

Here's how I structured it:

- admin.ps1

--- admin-config.ps1 (policies, tweaks)

--- disable-services.ps1

--- remove-flash.ps1

--- ...

- user.ps1 calls

--- user-config.ps1

--- disable-gamedrv.ps1

--- disable-services.ps1

--- ...

Because if you're using a regular user account (like you should) you need to run 3 things:

- admin.ps1 as admin

- user.ps1 as admin

- user.ps1 as your regular user

I gave up on using runAs or any of the things recommended on stackoverflow, something always go wrong so it's easier to do it this way.

For a fresh install, I recommend that the first thing you do is update everything and let Windows install the 200 apps you don't want. Run the 3 things like I mentioned, reboot, run it again, reboot.

https://github.com/cluberti/VDI/blob/master/ConfigAsVDI.ps1
https://github.com/W4RH4WK/Debloat-Windows-10/
https://github.com/dfkt/win10-unfuck
https://gist.github.com/sven212/5febf372aaa6e4cc1fda71ad9637...

My installation is months old and it runs like new even after heavy usage, hardware changes, tons of apps and games installed/uninstalled (this kills Windows 7). Just be careful what you remove, don't ever install ccleaner or any shit. All you need is sysinternals tools.

I'm too lazy to proof-read/make this shorter, hope it helps somebody.
He made a big point of complaining about this characterization at CPAC. He says he loves the media, welcomes criticism, isn't against negative stories, but is against fake news, making up sources, making up stories.

You don't have to believe that this is happening at the NYT to agree with the principle of what he's saying, that those who wage disinformation campaigns against the American people are the enemy of the people. Maybe you believe this is Trump. Maybe you believe this is the mainstream media. Maybe you believe it's the Russians, but somebody here is lying, and they are absolutely the enemy of the people.
They have only just started being critical of an administration. Prior to Trump they basically played the "access" game: they would eschew doing genuinely tough journalistic investigation in exchange for having access to high profile politicians in interviews and other situations. This isn't a liberal or conservative thing (I'm far to the left of this country's mainstream). Even the stuff they're going after Trump for is shallow obvious things, mainly because of the shallow obvious ways that Trump lies and otherwise acts poorly.
> more than 40 percent of Americans play at least three hours a week

Watching a single football game per week takes up more time. Honestly, 3-hours / week for an entertainment venue you enjoy is kinda small.

The average football game is 3-hours 12 minutes. The average baseball game is 2-hours 54 minutes.

I find it strange that in our culture, its fine to spend hours upon hours of watching Football, Basketball, Hockey, Baseball (and then play fantasy football and otherwise participate in social norms for even more hours throughout the week).

But a paltry 3-hours of video games spread out in a few sessions per day? That's outrageous!

----------

Lets compare apples to apples here. If you spend 3-hours gaming per week, its equivalent to watching a single game of football or baseball per week. Its honestly nothing to be ashamed of.

Now I played "Maple Story" (an awful MMORPG) for 4-hours a day at my peak. THAT is shameful and a waste. But 3-hours a week is more than reasonable, and just as healthy as any other entertainment venue. Hell, its arguably better to actually have your mind active in a video game than other, more passive, forms of entertainment.

Real hobbies (music, art, creation, programming, engineering...) probably are the best for your brain though. And you get useful skills to boot.
This ^

I say this every time and no one has ever been able to answer: how is a simple "don't prioritize traffic" some kind of competition-killing regulation, and how would removing it actually create competition anyway?
Have you tried Appengine flexible environment?
Note that TIME and the AP refused to take part if others were excluded.
What's a provider ? Can't you arbitrarily break a provider into smaller ones to avoid triggering this rule ?
If you think about it a two party system has a tendency to make the parties move towards the center in general. If a party gets much more extreme than the populace then they will lose easily against an opponent just a little more moderate than them. Trump's views seem a little more extreme than the general populace but if you look at it he didn't even win the popular vote.
It is said that babys who are spoken to in multiple languages speak later than those who are spoken to in just one language. Could this extra 'learning' cause the delay in speech?
The GOP mantra has been for at least 10 years that anyone in the media criticizing anything they do is a Liberal Shill Who Is Lying. Trump is just the natural conclusion of that stupidity, which is why he hates the NYT so much. They print evidence of his corruption and he can't stand it.

Thankfully this stunt is probably going to cause the NYT's subscription rate to go even higher than it currently is and will probably break another subscription record this month.
Or not at all.
Orbital resonances are a powerful phenomenon over a long enough time. This article doesn't mention it, but Mars's rotational axis is also chaotic. The whole planet can change its axis of rotation over the course of a few million years. It is likely that something similar happened to Mercury, though tidal friction has slowed its rotation enough that it's unlikely to occur anymore. The only reason this doesn't happen to the Earth is that the presence of the Moon stabilizes our rotation.

Also, there is a few percent chance that Mercury will be ejected from the Solar System due to orbital resonances before the Sun dies. A general principle of planetary dynamics is that systems are only barely stable --- they are stable only over timescales of approximately their lifetime. Then they will suddenly go through a period of chaos, only to settle into a slightly more stable state and start the whole process over again, with a longer timescale.
>if i studied and worked more, i would be much far by now. Probably rich.

Or not. Maybe at the same place in life. Studies are not as important as a defining criteria for your life as sociocultural group, or class. I wouldn't get too hung up on it if I were you, what's done is done.

>What if it paid well to be a Counter Strike player?

If you're a pro player, sure, it does. There are regular tournaments with $1m prize pools, teams like Virtus Pro pay their players generously. There's money in it, if you can manage to be in a top 16 European team. Or top 4 North America because of level discrepancies. That's around 100 spots.
There's more than $10B in demand for Snap's hot IPO
So the Treasury department tried to stop Fox from attending a meeting once, but didn't actually do it because it was wrong.

And he didn't go on a Fox Sunday news show one time.

Not really helping your case here.

They don't lie about him, they don't have to; they represent him as he represents himself. He says something out loud and they describe it, it's not their fault he changes his mind about what he wishes he had said after the fact.

He has taken to blatantly and explicitly lying about simple verifiable facts, and doubling down on those lies when challenged. How should the press deal with that besides calling it what it is? Why should they give him the benefit of the doubt after that?
I don't think a tremendous amount of time in training is mutually exclusive with brain-in-neutral activities. It's a question of what your goal is with the activity, and how you approach it as a result of that.

My friends and I play Overwatch. It's a game with an incredibly high skill ceiling, and if we wanted to compete professionally, sure, we'd have to spend a ton of time in focused training.

But we don't. We just hop on voice chat, play in Gold/Platinum against people of similar skill level, and we have a good time with it. Sometimes we'll pick up new strategies, we learn different characters, our aim and game-sense probably improve, but that's all secondary to hanging out and enjoying the game.

None of us are ever going to be competing in Master / GM / Top 500 tiers, and the amount of time it'd take to train and get better is immaterial to us because none of us want to.
Travis Kalanick is famously supportive of Objectivism, the philosophy where altruism is for losers and acting purely in motivated self-interest is the highest possible good. Once you know that, very little about Uber will surprise you anymore.

Complicated. I happen to believe that, regardless of how one desires to spin it, everyone already acts in their own motivated self-interest. It's just a question of how wiling you are to see interest and where you draw your connections. For example it is in my personal interest to not harm others usually because harming others makes me feel more bad in many instances than whatever I would stand to gain. Generally speaking when people feel that way we call them good people, and when people don't feel that way we call them sociopaths. The problem isn't that Travis Kalanick believes that he should act in his own self interest. The problem is that Travis Kalanick doesn't feel bad when harming others.
It's sad on one hand, but with the Internet and all the information out there, it's getting harder and harder to feel sorry for people falling for any kind of scam. I had relatives that fell for the whole Amway thing a long time ago, and they couldn't do a quick Internet search for "Amway scam" like they could today. Would they get taken in today? Not a chance. Before you hand over $5K to someone, does it really hurt to do a quick search to see if it's a scam or if you're likely to be unsuccessful?

I pretty much consider any money-making pitch I get to be a scam by default, which saves me the trouble of looking it up.
http://projectfreetv.us/ is a great alternative to this
Happy to post some links below. I'd also by interested in more good reading in this direction, particularly from someone in political science field (I am not).

Iron Law of Oligarchy: https://www.britannica.com/topic/iron-law-of-oligarchy

Selectorate Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selectorate_theory

Rules for Rulers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

The Dictators Handbook: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005GPSLHI/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...

The Logic of Political Survival: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/logic-political-survival
I think the main problem with the article is that it's conclusions are covered by signalling theory [1][2] but the author seems blissfully unaware that this field exists.

A signal of quality is likely to be reliable if it's inherently expensive to produce and is correlated to the desired metric. A big peacock tail is a reliable indicator of the peacock's health, because to falsely grow a bigger tail than it should support would end up being detrimental for the peacock. Same with lion manes, college degrees, etc.

The author points out that there are metrics and signals that can be overvalued, and that's true, but the hospital example is a terrible one because fellow physicians have access to the true quality of a doctor. A surgeon with a good degree, expensive watch, and nice clothing will not fool his or her fellow doctors because they actually see how they operate in the theatre. If a doctor X tells me that surgeon Y is good (and I trust doctor X), then that's sufficient evidence because doctor X almost certainly knows better than me, and I can entirely skip the process of evaluating surgeon Y's sartorial choices myself.

Where the author's point makes more sense is addressing pop-culture indications of quality, which are more likely to be incorrect because the general public (or the media industry specifically) is not an expert in any given field.

You probably shouldn't hire an engineer simply based on ideas of what hackers look and talk like gleaned from Mr. Robot, but I think most people already knew that?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory
> Isn't more competition among providers what we want?

Only at some levels. Physical last-mile connectivity is a natural monopoly; we shouldn't want more than one trench along each driveway. If an ISP has a local monopoly that only covers one city rather than a whole state, that doesn't change the dynamics of what's fair to their users.
I've seen a few websites that offer this same feature, how is BrokeFlix different from those?
Ack, I really need to pick that one up. Been too busy, but the original was a classic.
The LA Times?--not exactly a heavy hitter or even terribly liberal.

They must have just banned anybody with the word "Time" in their name.
That's very noble of the AP, but I would imagine that though those organizations must feel as though they must attend their press briefings out of duty to their readership. I think as long as they're willing to treat their trade with the dutifulness it deserves, those organizations do not deserve shame for this.
This country has gone mad. The Trump supporters will justify and applaud everything he does while he burns down the world.

Why even pretend we have a democracy anymore? Trump and his WH are busy eroding and suprressing every form of free speech and I can't think of a single thing him or the Republicans stand for that actually helps people.
> actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible?

I don't think very many of the net-neutrality zealots have much technical understanding of internetworking or how ISP business models work.

Anything other than a dedicated, business class circuit has a lot of shaping and speculation baked in. This is why "residential" bandwidth is so much cheaper than dedicated.

One commenter last time this came up mentioned that the best practice for residential bandwidth providers is to have 50% headroom. As QoS algorithms get better, and traffic patterns are better understood, the amount of headroom ISPs need to buy will decrease, or it will get cheaper (as upstream providers arbitrage into a peak / off-peak (expected vs unexpected) model.

The thing we need to preserve about ISP incentives is that there should always be an incentive to improve network quality.

However for networks, quality is in the eye of the beholder. If your customers want to download 4K movies, maybe 1000ms of latency is not a big deal.

But if they want to do remote screen sharing or gaming (where even small latency is noticeable) then 1000ms latency would cause the ISP to go out of business.

The technical aspect of this that many people miss is that the same piece of cable can support very different traffic patterns (often but not always) AT THE EXPENSE OF other ones. Net neutrality seemingly advocates having lawyers and politicians come up with the "correct" shaping for all traffic, with no knowledge of what an ISP's customers want to use the circuit for, and no knowledge of what protocols might become popular next year.

Net Neutrality advocates want politicians and lawyers to effectively force ISPs to support a QoS that is closer to some unspecified ideal which those pols and lawyers have no idea about. They are simply being pressured/hired to do something they are clueless about, which helps some businesses and hurts others.

Google wants net neutrality because all service providers prefer that others bear the cost of delivering their content to end users. All content providers would generally agree.

But last mile providers would disagree, because they are faced with spikes in demand and growing/shrinking user-bases and are fighting not just against the price of bandwidth but the technological limits imposed by cable modems, LTE, etc. They would rather not have added constraints placed upon them (which will add costs).

While someday it may be necessary to prevent predatory QoS schemes from being imposed, there is not an adequate level of sophistication in regulators to trust them to create wise regulation in this area.
Cloudflare’s Cloudbleed Surface Area