skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is no one moral philosophy that adequately covers every situation. If there was we'd just use that and not have all of these other options. They are tools to consider (and sometimes reject) just like other parts of philosophy.

What Utilitarianism is good for is making policy decisions that are not directly related to human rights, and therefore may not have a clear cut answer in other philosophies. [edit clarity]
It's those moments when you see a dude in a $600 Arc'Teryx jacket at Safeway ;)
How much of that "99% unreleased" is represented by the stub files:

::: THIS ARCHIVE FILE IS STILL BEING EXAMINED BY WIKILEAKS. :::
::: IT MAY BE RELEASED IN THE NEAR FUTURE. WHAT FOLLOWS IS :::
::: AN AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED LIST OF ITS CONTENTS: :::
Does cloudflare take users to a webpage that isn't yours with a header with a button that doesn't lead to your site?
It'll be smaller because gzip can only losslessly compress what is there but minifying first can lossfully remove characters like comments or with conversions like "0px" to "0".
The Legislature is free to pass a Legislative Constitutional Amendment to remove part or all of Prop 13 protections (e.g. for commercial or rental property at least); all it would take is a simple majority of voters to take effect. They can even pick and choose which statewide election to use.
Let's not do the thing where everyone you disagree with is a troll, mmkay?
> From a technical perspective

I'm not sure what this means. I'm aware of the theoretical argument.

The great majority obey the law because they want to. The threat of jail is actually minor; you can get away with quite a bit.
If they make less than men, why don't companies hire women alone? Don't they want to save money on salaries?
If they can only spend the EBI on insurance, it's a fixed health care subsidy or tax credit depending on how you frame it. I may simply be confused though, because every example I know of for EBI means "unrestricted base income".

Can we just call it something other than EBI if you're talking about restricting how it is spent?

In any event, if I understand you, it's a fixed amount per person.

That doesn't seem like it does much to address the moral imperative of guaranteeing affordable health care if sick people are on much more expensive health care plans or if the available affordable plans don't cover what they need. So you'd have to offer varying amounts depending on need, in order to meet that moral imperative.

And once you're talking about varying the amount, it is not very close to what I think you're describing.

Is there some way to reconcile these ideas and constraints that I'm missing? Because I suspect Congress would love to hear it...
Make them move out of the streets and into the country.
It's starting to sound like civilization. When we live together, I don't want to subsidize your poor decisions.

If you want to live your life alone in a forest somewhere, you can pay no tax and make all your own decisions.
Currently, social security takes in $801.6B in revenue and pays out $750.5B a year, and social security has a $2.8 trillion trust fund. After 2022, outflows will exceed inflows, and social security will have to draw down on that trust fund, which will be exhausted by 2035.[1]

From the charts in the NYT article, Puerto Rico's fund is taking in <$400M a year and paying out >$600M, and their trust fund is less than $1B, and will be exhausted by 2020.

Social security is still running a surplus, and still has a massive trust fund. It definitely seems plausible to make changes that will make it solvent well into the future.

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
> Yeah, I'm sure all the people who chose to get cancer or be born prematurely are just leeching

Please don't vent snark like this on HN, even when someone else is wrong and/or started it. Your comment would be just fine without that.
> Selling professional-grade gear to people with no intention of using it professionally isn’t exactly a new trick in marketing, as the makers of SUVs, digital cameras and headphones can tell you.

A ton of companies started out selling legitimately tough things and then turned into just another logo on semi-acceptable products. The Hummer H1 was a legitimately strong vehicle, and could easily climb a 60% slope and travel over actually tough terrain - with 16" of ground clearance on a 72" tall vehicle. The H2 was a disgustingly fuel inefficient large truck, and the H3 was just a standard pickup with an ugly grille.

Some of my friends who explore/climb/etc all the time used to buy North Face gear; now, it's mostly another brand for college students. The last thing I personally bought from North Face was a jacket a few years ago - I wore the jacket a handful of times and into the closet it went.

Anyone else know more brands that did this? Start out selling gear for pros and then use that image to sell to people who just like the logo? I'd also love to hear about brands that aren't just clothing.
>I'd love to see one time ... one time.. there be a focus on the disparity between men and women in waste services, janitorial services, etc.

Why?

>We accept they don't prefer those jobs but suddenly in tech (since it became sexy) its now a problem?

You answered this yourself. One of the fields is desirable and the other isn't so of course there is going to be more concern about the desirable one.
Exactly, that's the problem.
This is so on point.

The entire economy seems to be driven by housing in Australia.

Its a massive ponzi scheme with developers making the big bucks and the tax system geared to assist investors at the expense of first home buyers.

If housing crashes there will be a lot of very angry people in this country. Developers and governments need to wake up.
I think it's a lot easier if you just flip that rule. Don't eat before 1pm or something like that. Basically, skip breakfast. Seems a lot easier, and the fasting interval should be about the same.

Perhaps I'm biased because this is what I naturally do.
Isn't a cubesat on the ground called... a box?

There's no mention of a past or future launch in the article, so this looks like an egregious case of buzzwording.
I get updates on Win 7
About face North Face in Patagonia.
Difficulty on hills is just a matter of going cheap.

Putting a motor on each axle or wheel normally solves the problem.

For more extreme situations: cable car, cog railway, linear motor... all of which can actually go vertical but then we call it an elevator.
Why? Disagree with your reasoning, it's not about per-capita, it's about absolute numbers in the risk pool and ability for a large actor like CA to better negotiate prices down.

Why do you think Apple gets better prices than, e.g. Logitech for component parts? Because they order massively more, up-front, and with strict timetables for delivery.
Another point to highlight here is that it helps to contrast acute stressors vs. chronic stressors. I'd characterize decades of insulin-raising (or roughage/indigestables-heavy) overfeeding as a chronic stressor, and a 3-week fast every month or other month too, whereas intermittent fasting is probably more of an acute stressor --- somewhat akin to "the right amount, not too little not too much" of exercise, the kind of stressor that rapidly mobilizes heightened repair and protection mechanisms, as well as stored excess resources to pay for this. Not a bad deal.
What does amp give me that a non-js page can't?

Also, applications aren't the target for amp.
Another interesting podcast here, with the story of how Chouinard gave the CEO position of Patagonia spin-off Black Diamond to Peter Metcalf

http://enormocast.com/episode-90-peter-metcalf-big-peaks-and...
yes, it's all very fascinating.

there is starting to emerge a small, fringe group of people that believe calories-in-calories-out is a complete myth (or, more specifically, calories-out is a complete unknown given current understanding of metabolic science), which pretty much sends people into apoplectic fits of rage when they hear about it. even if it turns out to be a complete troll, it's great entertainment watching the science develop/debate.
I remember these arguments made when Jerry Brown first proposed the newer upper income tax bands in 2009.

Considering, for a very long time, California's taxes have been the highest in the country (to be fair, definitely not "much much higher" than NYC,) last I checked it was adding jobs at a higher percentage rate than any other state.

Do you really think there's been an entrepreneur exodus from the Bay Area and LA since 2009?
Yeah, Assange can go get stuffed. He has lost all credibility with this drips and drabs bullshit in an attempt to keep himself some kind of "celebrity".

Release it and let people figure it out or shut the fuck up.

Snowden is a hero. Assange is an asshat.
>>>underlying problems of sexism and favoritism

How much a cuckold you have to be? Do you enjoy when other men fuck your wife/gf?
Barring the handful of cases, there is no sexism and favoritism. It's all made up so that wealthy/rich people can keep the chaos and inner fighting while maximizing the profit.

Get out and get some fresh air.
I don't think anyone disagrees that single payer requires higher taxes than we currently pay

I disagree, in the sense that I don't take that as a given. Remember, all of the current inefficiencies in and profits for the carriers go away and are instead fed directly into the system of care.

The first problem is, how could the government simply take over? Eminent Domain? Constitutional amendment?
If we are talking about Mars, then the colony might not like the Earth-centric origin[1] of the definition of meter, but be ok with human centric foot.

1). The original definition of meter was based on the size of the Earth.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13825745 and marked it off-topic.
What's "e10s"?
Uber’s new head of its AI labs has stepped down from his role
The Fitbit app is great for counting calories. Very easy to use and it has a great database.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13825673 and marked it off-topic.
All of SS savings are in special non-marketable bonds. When SS needs to sell those bonds the only potential customer is the federal govt. So ultimately if SS pays out more than it collects in a year the difference will come from the general federal budget.

That's my understanding, right?

The federal govt selling bonds to itself is a really strange form of savings.
This seems like a great example of how seductive it can be to over-fragment a system, and suddenly have hard-to-debug microservices for all those little pieces, when really all that's needed in a case like this is a front-end app that does login, sessions, billing, everything except the rendering work which goes off to a queue-based worker service.
Dad of two here.

Good question. What I'm reading in your question that many replies are missing out on is that your question is less about the actual responsibilities, which I see you happy to take up. It is about what to do with your mind which, now when not at work, can only think about your kids. Also there is this feeling that you should put your kids first and above yourself.

If that is the case, focusing inward helps. If you're at a place or time where your kids are not a matter - they might be safe and sound asleep, you may be on a work trip, you may be up a bit early on a day, whatever; at that time, you can tell yourself that it is OK to focus on your expansion.

I also found the time constraint changing what leveling up means to me - instead of picking up that new framework or tool, going deeper into whatever I want to.
It's financially feasible if everyone's contributing. So if it were done as a progressive tax, just like income tax, rather than making a portion of it employer paid while then exempting employers who operate in multiple state; in fact in today's world exempting companies that don't even do business in the state other than having employees in that state is a problem. There's also no integration with Medicaid or Medicare.

Anyway, there's no reason it's a financial funding problem. No matter what it's some kind of tax. Either it's a government tax for a government operated health care system (single payer); or it's a tax on the business vis a vis employer based insurance where they are the true customer not those who are insured; or it's a tax on the employee getting a plan on the market place if the employer doesn't provide one.

The number one problem is that it's simply too profitable for doctors, hospitals, clinics, and insurance companies right now, to have system that incentivizes pay per procedure per per visit, rather than paying for health. It is not health care, it's sick care. Very little of our system incentivizes health. A miniscule number of insurers pay if you actually show up at a gym, not merely pay for the gym; or pay you to lose weight by actually getting weighed at an approved clinic, and so on.

It's presently politically untenable that we have for-profit education to become a doctor, and salaried doctors.

And there probably isn't a way to make this work on a scale like Vermont. It's probably possible to do it on the scale of California, but deeply depends on the politics.

Democrats basically took a dump on ACA. They tried to get Republicans on board, which is why they went with the Heritage Foundation plan. But then Republicans didn't go for it anyway. So what they should have done, hindsight being 20/20, is offer Americans a way to buy into Medicare rather than set up all these stupid state exchanges to expand a busted for-profit system. Oh well!
HR in the US is overwhelmingly women. Maybe it's an issue of women negotiating with other women.
It was an unsupported allegation by Daily Dot. See https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-March/03...
Oh, I get AMP just fine. I get that it's a power play by Google. The problem AMP is trying to solve is very real. But instead of trying to fix the problem, Google is using it to take an even greater chunk of the web.

No thanks
Blurify.js is a tiny(~2kb) library to blurred pictures
Thanks, we added 'make findings' above. If someone suggests a better (more accurate and neutral) title we can change it again.
> It seems that eating is inherently stressful for the body.

It seems that eating 3 meals a day, every day, like clockwork, is not the best strategy overall (to say nothing of perpetual snacking in between). I think some signal starts to show above the noise in the data, indicating that our metabolism is optimized for a less regular schedule - or at least a schedule interspersing times of abundance with intervals of constraint.

If that's the case, then we have to simulate and replace the external constraints of Stone Age yore with voluntary restraint.
I would argue that banding together as a society to stop a marketing industry whose goal it is (in many cases) to scientifically undermine our agency is exactly people taking responsibility for their own bodies and lives.

Is that not the effect of "asking the government to step in and help us?"
No man is an island, but if you want to try, there's still wilderness out there to build utopian Galt's Gulches without even having to seastead.
Aboriginal Mitogenomes Reveal 50,000 Years of Regionalism in Australia
There is also no reason why you cant operate a single payer scheme AND a private insurance scheme in parallel, its just that EVERYBODY should contribute to the single payer scheme, whether they need it of not.
"Irreversible" life choices, in no particular order:

* Getting convicted for an offense with "mandatory minimum" jail time - e.g. dealing drugs to minors.

* Driving drunk, crashing and getting fully paralyzed - 'coz "driving drunk" is a choice.

* Having unprotected sex and living with HIV - for the rest of your days.

* Getting college/higher education, on a student loan, in a field that does not/will not pay at a high enough rate to payback the loan - good luck discharging that.

* Doing any high-risk physical activity with a >50% chance of serious bodily harm/injury. (Death is OK, by this metric!)

... logically refute all of the above and I'll give you the remaining 7 :P
Google's Closure tools have been able to do this for several years. It's mainly documented at https://github.com/google/closure-stylesheets/blob/master/RE... but has counterparts in Closure Compiler, and Templates; for JS and HTML, respectively.
Because women are subconsciously undervalued as workers.

This discussion is complex and it's not entirely obvious how much of the pay gap is caused by discrimination, but this is one stupid argument.
> The subjects were in a residence for old people, and all were in perfect health and over 65.
It's a bad idea to compare California to Canada or Australia, because even with our great economy we don't control our currency. Countries can deficit-spend but we have to actually pay for things.

This is the same flaw (see Strong Towns) that leads cities to tear down useful buildings and replace it with parking lots and highways, because the federal government gave them money to build them, but not to maintain them… so they go broke.

Huh, I just realized I'm wrong because California voters always approve state bond measures. We're safe after all.
I completely disagree with your comments.

What globalists? Sources? Name them.

Welfare is a system with a good purpose, but poor implementation. The goal is to help lift people up who are down and out. It turns out it's incredibly difficult to get groups of people on their feet with minimal monetary assistance. I have heard lots of people refer to welfare recipients as lazy, but have never heard anyone in any sort of position of authority say that laziness is the goal.

No taxes means no military, interstate highways, FDA, FBI, post office, nationak parks, federal courts, etc.

No taxes means NO regulations and NO federal laws, since taxes pay for the people who enforce regulations and laws. no regulations means the country is given to the strongest corporations with
0 oversight. Dump chemicals wherever you want, put whatever you want in food (sawdust, bleach, etc), etc.

Passing a federal law does nothing without a federal government to enforce it.

Congress empowers agencies so they can monitor and regulate an industry for the public good. Otherwise congress would have to pass a law for every little thing which would bog the government down. People get upset about regulations, but a lot of them exist because some person or organization did something to harm the public interest and a regulation was created to prevent it from happening again.

Can agencies get out of control? Absolutely, and it's congress's job to rein them in. While they report to the president all theirs power comes form the legislative branch.

As an aside? Why do you have infowars.com at the end of your comment? Infowars isn't a source appropriate for this forum
It's not that rare for optimizers to be able to find more optimizations in a subsequent pass. For example, it's often true (for at least small gains) in assembly peephole optimizers. Once you've applied one round of peephole optimizations, which are basically just simple pattern-matching replacing instruction sequences with better ones, the resulting, improved instruction sequence may now have new sequences that the peephole optimizer could improve again if run a second time. You could try running this iteratively until some kind of fixed point if compilation time were no issue... although, it might also have cycles! That is often the nature of these kinds of pattern-matching, heuristic optimization passes. That's especially likely if you mixed-and-matched from different compilers, like running optimization passes from gcc, clang, and icc interleaved with each other. Though that example would be difficult to do in practice, because they aren't source-to-source optimizers, and have totally different IRs, so can't easily be chained in the way these CSS-to-CSS optimizers can be chained.
sounds like communism to me. I prefer survival of the fittest, and you don't sound very fit to me, which makes it understandable why you would be in favor of everyone else supporting the load.
Oh, there is no freaking comparison. Pets won't swipe stuff off your desk, practice their infinite regression of "why" on you, yank your pony tail, hand you stuff they swiped from another desk, knock over your empty-soda-can pyramid, try to eat a nerf dart, or demand your attention so they can explain to you how they are super-special and going to heaven because Jesus loves them.

No, I am not kidding or making up any of the above, though it wasn't all the same kid, nor all the same day (or even the same workplace), and admittedly I have no phobias or allergies.
The crowd sourcing aspect is accurate, but I think the turk half is used more generically past the actual Amazon browser GUI experience tool to whatever annotation tool one has available or has invested development in. Stuff like https://www.crowdflower.com/

One other thing worth pointing out is why you can't always lean on the Amazon Turk per se because some of the tasks you need to train from require specialist knowledge that takes years to hone. It is not a task for the common layperson who can spot a cat in an image or anything else that exploits "common knowledge". In the case of the company I'm at we had to pay contract work for these specialists to come in house and operate our annotation tools to build up our ground truth data.
I understand that's the conservative/libertarian position

FWIW, conflating conservatism and libertarianism is a mistake. There's some incidental overlap, just like there is between libertarianism and liberalism, but that's pretty much the extent of it.

Are you against that as well?

Yes, of course. Basically, if the word "force" is involved, it's wrong. Come up with a way to collectively fund infrastructure that's voluntary and I'm all for it. But if your idea needs force / violence to be executed, then, well, maybe it isn't such a good idea after all.
I've been doing this for a couple years now (only coffee/water before 12pm and no food after 7-8pm). It's a very effective method of calorie restriction for me.

Only eating before 1pm would be absolute torture for me!
I don't understand what you mean there. I think you underestimate the administrative costs alone of the US' hodgepodge system (an entire floor at UCSF is devoted to insurance processing, how many floors does UBC have for billing?)

The US health care system even for the middle class is a disaster. Deductibles are often nearly 8k or higher alone! And nearly ALL plans have "networks" so you can't go to whatever doctor you want anyway. (One of my canadian friends doesnt even know what a deductible is!)

You realize there are nearly as many Americans without any insurance as there are people in Canada (27M vs 34M)? And this was AFTER the ACA expansion.

I get trying to post an alternative view, but it's so out of wack. Have you experienced the US health care system for an extended period of time personally? It sounds like you haven't.
In your worldview, those people don't deserve to have health.

No, that is not my worldview, not in the slightest.
I understand what a Monad is. My point is that high-quality OOP code typically adheres to the rules of Monads.

I didn't say Monads were objects. I simply talked through the most common properties and operations of OOP code, in order to show how they are closely related to the operations on Monads.

I understand that OOP code does not, in general, satisfy the constraints of Monads. Hence, why I specified high-quality OOP code, which, in contrast, typically does.
It's Manning stuff, I think. And it's not that they're "holding back" stuff. It's been torrented, but encrypted.
Kindness is fitness. Depending on who you're being kind to.