skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I work on a streaming system (IBM Streams). I was reading through one of your blog posts (http://www.jonathanbeard.io/blog/2015/09/19/streaming-and-da...), and I saw this comment:

'Storm, Samza, and Spark are open-source streaming platforms that are focused on message-based data processing. These systems differ from other classic "streaming" modalities in that they eschew point to point communication for centralized brokers to distribute data.'

That's maybe true for Spark, but it's not true for Storm and Samza (or of Streams). Yes, there is some centralization for application control, but there is no centralized data broker. That is, all messages are not routed through a centralized broker. I believe Storm does route all messages that come through the same JVM through the same logic and connection, but that's quite different from having a completely centralized broker. I can't speak for certain Samza, but I would be very surprised if it used a centralized broker.

In Streams, I can say for certain that there is no centralized broker; messages are definitely sent "point to point."
> You're projecting. At least let him explain his reasoning. Creating your own fictional version which you can denounce prior that that explanation doesn't really help the conversation.

a) That isn't what projecting means.

b) He asked him about his reasoning and then criticized an explicitly hypothetical scenario. Note the 'if'.
> if you just give people handouts they lose incentive and drive

Is there any evidence of this? I see this argument used a lot to dissuade from the "handouts" thing and for not helping people. Don't non-profits technically receive handouts? Aren't grants technically handouts?

A handout, as I understand it, is money given that isn't meant to be paid back. I think a good portion of handouts already exist, it's just easier to justify not giving handouts to people that are societally (or personally) perceived as inferior because it's easy to not empathize with their situation.
I also recommend it, and this is one of the rare animes where I can say I actually prefer the English dub over subtitles due to the raucous and raunchy nature of the series.

Although in my opinion the plot went completely off the rails by episode 6 and failed to recapture its original charm at every bizarre twist and turn. Either way, I still watched it through to the end.
If you include the DVD service they have practically everything. I've been rating movies I've watched in Netflix since 2005-ish. IMDB makes sense, but I chose Netflix and now I'm stuck with them. Data silos suck.
I am almost certain the details of the specific vulnerabilities would be classified. You probably had to sign some kind of NDA to even participate if I had to guess.
I have no doubt you are right about the people who rate online (you definitely see it in restaurant ratings and comment sections) but when I rate movies on Netflix I very, very rarely ever rate something a 1 or a 5. I would imagine that 2/3 of what I rate has been a three (so average content for me) and that it takes something special to go up or down from there.

Just curious if I am an outlier with how I do my ratings.
I know I've done well when I've got both sides mad at me. Here is where I see the similarity between you and those guys on the other side who are also arguing with me: you want a perfect solution. My initial comment poses gun rights as a tradeoff between violence and the limitations on governmental power. This makes your side start commenting about how guns are a perfect solution, they'll lower violence. And it causes the gun-controllers to start talking about how gun control is a perfect solution because it will lower violence and it's pointless to try to overthrow the government.

Now it's hard to have a fact-based debate about guns considering the polarized discourse. I ask three things.

1) Consider that just maybe, access to a device which allows you to kill quickly, cleanly and with lessened emotional involvement (versus say a knife) leads to more people murdering.

2) Consider that people are not cleanly seperated into law-abiders and criminals, people move back and forth all the time and there are various degrees of law-breaking and criminality. When you turn people who commit gun crimes into an other, it's a lot easier to seperate yourself from their actions. I would also say that saying that criminals are all these extreme monsters who will violate ANY law to be able to kill however they want is just a complete mischaracterization.

3) Consider that I support the bill this thread is about and reread my initial comment.
The only way housing would suck up the entire UBI is if everyone were trapped in a California situation where new housing was impossible.

Provided there are no location/COL adjustments.
Which article are you talking about? I've tried using HN's search to find it, but my google-fu is failing me.
How does YC feel about funding on AR, VR and mobile games technology?
We are considering using S4 (http://www.supersimplestorageservice.com/), it's probably the best place to store your important data.
Wow, literal quotas? That's just discriminatory.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13886105
It's literally in the intro paragraph.

> RaftLib enables programmers to stitch together parallel code from sequential kernels (both pipeline and task parallel), with far fewer lines of code than most other parallelization frameworks (while being just as performant).
Did Kansas's economy tank? I was under the impression that unemployment has dropped at similar rates to comparable states.

The primary impact has been massive reduction in the ability of the state government to provide services, including education. That is too long-term to be immediately measurable.
Did they take a large equity share with onerous terms? It seems like things were somewhat disorganized and ad hoc, though you might have missed some information by not attending the sessions / etc.

Perhaps the program didn't fully deliver on providing a lot of value to the company, but that's certainly not unethical or fraudulent.
The Garden of Forking Paths [pdf]
Zapier has stated elsewhere in the comments that they don't adjust salaries.
> improper search of their personal papers to prove their citizenship

this is pretty sensationalized. It's very rational to request proof of citizenship before allowing entry to a country
That's the percentage of the population, which is why I was careful to say voters. In your own comment you acknowledge that 46.09% of voters voted for him. The opinions of those that choose not to vote in a country with free elections are completely irrelevant.
At risk of talking politics, for example, she spoke against Sanders plan on universal health care at an important point in the race [1]. If she later changed her stance to be for universal health care, I don't think people either realized it or believed it - basically she needed to commit to it strongly enough so that it would be politically hard to flop after winning and not do it (to gain the voters who cared about that). Fwiw, it sounds like she is now running for NY governor, hopefully she wins that.

[1] https://theintercept.com/2016/01/13/hillary-clinton-single-p...
It's probably the real software control system for the ship they probably just don't have an actual rail gun at the end of the FireRailGun() function. At least I hope they don't.
In 2010, the Social Network was searing – now it looks quaint
>Just look at any ranking of healthcare outcomes for developed nations.

Yes, I addressed that. Look at our obesity rates. That has almost nothing to do with healthcare access and almost everything to do with our average lifespan.
I think he's saying people don't aspire to depend on entitlements.
That's similar to what EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center) said in a filing mentioned in the article:

> "Privacy rules for ISPs are important and necessary, but it is obvious that the more substantial privacy threats for consumers are not the ISPs," the advocacy group said. The bigger threat is posed by "the largest email, search, and social media companies."

By which they're obviously referring to Google and Facebook without naming them. CTIA, the mobile broadband lobbying group, cited this statement in their argument:

"even a prominent privacy advocacy organization asserted that it is 'obvious that the more substantial threats for consumers are not ISPs,' but rather other large edge providers."

I think that, while "large edge providers" may presently collect user information, there is greater potential for ISPs if left unchecked and harder for users to avoid.
You say:

> No, I am not projecting.

And then you go on to pull out a bunch of statistics and imply the statement was about half of all US voters, and calling them "monsters", instead of the actual statement, which was about a single person.

Then you specifically acknowledge you still don't know what his justifications are:

> If it's just more politically-motivated Valley-bubble drivel, then there is nothing to see here.

Perhaps you need to look up what projecting means. Or, if you prefer, we can call what you're doing a Straw Man man argument. Not quite the same, but related, and it also applies.
Or at least it’s going back to its original meaning from Monty Python.
I lived in Houston about 30 years ago, and you had to either love driving in bumper to bumper traffic or live inside the loop to have easy access to the arts for people with normal working hours. Walking to anything would make me want to take a shower by the time I got to my destination.
Hello Michael,

I was suggested by few YC Alums that YC will not accept a startup if the founders are not working full time on it.

Question: In my case I am working full time because it's helping me fund my startup and It's actually helping me grow it due to connection to my peers (I am M.D from India working on a Health Startup). Is this a bad sign ?

I simply do not have the resources (and enough revenue) to quit my job Yet. But I am dedicated 200 % towards my startup and the vision. And I spend most of my time (outside of work) on my startup.
Sure, but consider what you're selecting out with that approach. Recent grads who just need to scrape enough money for a room and some ramen can go all in on their idea. Mid 30's with a family can't. 20's person might find the billion dollar disruptive idea, coming fresh out of a less bounded college experience or youth in general. 30's person might find the billion dollar enterprise solution, having spent 10-15 years in fortune 500 companies.

I have bias to disclose - I'm in the 2nd category, and my ideas and projects are probably very different, with a very different target market, than me 15 years ago (or someone else 15 years younger than me right now). I'm also not seriously pursuing anything at the moment, so this is hypothetical: Not only do I have a roof to keep over my family's head, I also (no offense intended here) probably have a higher opportunity cost as a barrier as well. All in on an idea for me has hard and soft costs that are very different from someone just starting out. It's not to say someone similar to me should expect to throw a few hours every two weeks at a project and merit serious consideration, but putting 25% of time and energy for some is a BFD that I think passes the commitment threshold in certain instances.

Whether it's YC, a startup, or your role in a mature business of any size, you must approach ideas through various lenses beyond your own. Please take this all constructively, I'm not trying to say I'm better because I'm older or anything like that - my point is that there are broader considerations that make varying degrees of commitment to an idea more similar than you'd think.
If I email my lawyer, and the email isn't sent over encrypted SMTP, is this a violation of attorney-client privilege…?
I definitely agree with this. I like the guy, seriously genuine and far from corrupt. However, offering "free" anything doesn't solve anything and I don't believe neither he or his supporters can see, nor do they want to see, the bigger picture of such policies.
I flew into Dallas during a storm once, plane was struck by lightning many, many times. It was pretty spooky, but that was all. The lightning simply passes through the exterior of the plane. However if there is a gap in the exterior, then damage could occur.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-happens-when...
It is perfectly clear here that "distribution" is a separate list element, set off by the final disjunction "or":

The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of:

The pattern being: A, B, C, D or E.

This does not change even if we add a spurious comma after D:

A, B, C, D, or E.

D and E are still separately listed items.

Quite simply, D or E cannot be a single list item without being preceded by some conjunction.

If the intended meaning were "packing (for shipment or distribution)" to the exclusion of "distribution", then the conjunction "and" or "or" would be required before that entire phrase:

A, B, C, D or E for X or Y.

Here the entire phrase E for X or Y (such as packing for shipment or distribution) is now the last list item (and, again, that is clear whether or not we add a spurious comma after D).

The "or" in (for shipment or distribution) belongs to this inner phrase and therefore cannot serve as the delimiting conjunction of the last list item; another delimiter is required.

Thus, the insertion of the comma makes no difference. The alternative interpretation is hard to justify, because it is based on the claim that a meaning-altering conjunction is missing, even though the existing text happens to be grammatical.
Thanks, we need more of that courageous attitude in our industry. It's one thing if a company makes a generic product, markets it as such, and bad people happen to decide to use it for bad purposes. It's a totally different thing if a company markets their products as great ways to commit human rights abuses--even if those abuses are legal--shouldn't that at least raise a few eyebrows?
How does that square with the millions more votes Hillary won?

It is really bizarre. She's said to be an awful politician, yet won the popular vote in '08, and in '16 during the primaries and general.
Windows is tragic in many respects, but proprietary incentives did speed up computer development early on whereas GPL has slowed things down, and been sidelined, again and again.

Increasingly, corporations are concluding that investing in licenses for other's proprietary software is wasteful and they are seeking out open source software where they can, to avoid lock-in and network effects. So a hundred years from now, that may be the standard view of proprietary software. Long before that I hope we recognize how awkward applying artistic copyright to code is, and grant a four or seven year copyright, but only once the code has been revealed. The purpose of granting intellectual property rights was originally to create public goods, that's just not what's happening with computer code.
“Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.” -- Henry 'World population needs to be decreased by 50%' Kissinger
> Those are issues that Obama ran on twice...

And then completely failed to enact or really even push (outside of ACA which I acknowledge as an improvement).

> Did they not realize the alternative?

They sure liked her in primary season despite plenty of evidence she was weaker against Trump.
No. I haven't said that, and I was trying to be really explicit about what exactly I meant. Sorry if I had failed to convey the exact meaning.

I'm saying "if you're aware (and now that person is) that you have this illness it may be smart to take disable animations".
Well, IBM has had experience helping countries figure out who does and does not belong. Germany in the 30s comes to mind.
Thanks,

I read that a long time ago and forgotten that was there.
My email is my profile
Even faster UTF-8 character counting
All gender-based quotas are discriminatory. Even a 50% quota would be. Professional choices should not be made based on gender.
how about bringing back manufacturing jobs for a start? how about deregulation so employers can hire more people? how about lowering taxes? how about enforcing legal immigration so that working class people stand a chance of getting a job?
Refusing POW rights is as much a reflection on those they fight as it is on ISIS. If you're making categories like this you have crossed the moral line, if not the legal one.
so is not having women in STEM. Pick your poison.
It's not a loan. They don't require any repayment. It's a discount.

>This is almost the definition of a win-win.

Not long-term for the company that gets lured into this trap. Just like with Cisco/Oracle, companies will waste millions of dollars once they are cornered into a situation like this because the switching costs are so high even though there are plenty of other alternatives.
I suppose my point of contention is the very idea of being "politically neutral". You may be somewhere in the middle politically, but I'm not convinced that makes you politically neutral. For example, a libertarian approach to healthcare may well result in more poor people dying than a state-driven approach. Does a politically neutral person just... have no opinion one way or the other about that? I find that difficult to believe.

I hesitate to even bring it up, but many of the tyrants of the 20th Century were responsible for the death of millions, and for decidedly political reasons. Does a politically neutral person object to calling Stalin a monster on the basis that, aside from his politics, he was a good family man?

(No, I'm not saying Peter Thiel is Stalin. Politics exists in a vast, vast spectrum - but I'm not convinced there is a place where that spectrum doesn't exist)
It varies based on state law. The federal DOT can't pass its own traffic laws or regulations for constitutional reasons, so they incentivise states to implement what they think is a good idea by offering them financial incentives. The best example of this is the 21-year-old drinking age. (They threatened to cut off all highway funding for states that didn't raise it from 18 to 21.)

Pretty much every traffic officer I know could find at least 5 reasons to pull over any car, no matter how scrupulous the driver.
As with anything, there's a spectrum to these things. Some will interact positively with their family but won't venture out of the house at all. Some might occasionally go out of the house as well. The western media's portrayal is a bit extreme and sensationalist (surprise!).
Nope, Blink isn't a fork of webkit, it's a total rewrite and has a BSD license that webkit doesn't. Which was the point of doing the rewrite.
The problem is not that this comment isn't popular, it's that it violates the guidelines by being uncivil and unsubstantive. Please don't post like this here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The DNC excluded independent voters in several states during primaries, independent voters they needed to win the general.

The voters she won in the primary were not the voters she needed to win. Oops.

EDIT: @akhilcacharya: Why expect independents to vote for your candidate if the party doesn't give them a say in the nominee? You want your cake and eating it too, and hence, you lose.
Maybe douche is just a francophile who appreciates hygiene.
>If we ignore the fact that the US is in the 10 OECD nations with lowest life expectancy.

We have among the lowest life expectancy because we have among the highest obesity. That has almost nothing to do with healthcare access.

>There's a bunch of over-testing, over-diagnosis, and over-treatment in the US. These make customers feel like they're getting good service, even though they're being harmed by it.

If you really believe that getting too much access to healthcare treatments is the big problem in our country, you might be in the wrong discussion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2zGFXaPn0o
Maybe.

But if that happened and then the HHS decided to pursue it, the ISP would claim they're simply a conduit for PHI and that the privacy rule doesn't apply.
It's the overprotective and overcaring parents who enable this behavior in the first place.
There were a couple of studies that showed that in developing countries where social support structures aren't strong you generally see a lot more women go into the less gender traditional fields such as engineering. See Eastern Europe, China, India etc.

However once a country's quality of life goes up dramatically, women generally (this word is key, there are always outliers) will gravitate towards more traditional feminine occupations such as nursing, teaching, etc . See the Scandinavian countries.
If war can have ethics, can the Times have ethics? If the times CAN have ethics, why did it report this headline:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/international-students...

for this study?

http://www.aacrao.org/docs/default-source/TrendTopic/Immigra...

(see bottom of page 1 in particular.)

Sigh.
It was very difficult to do anything other than engineering, medicine, finance, law, and science in India pre-2000s. Then, with the software and internet and mobile revolutions, in the late 90s and 2000s, software and electronics were substantially more lucrative than pure science or other branches of engineering. Things are becoming more like the US nowadays- with liberal arts being a viable option as the middle class is becoming richer and as children of the first wave of software nouveau riche come of age and their wealth providing some cushion for the liberal-arts and creative types.

There were not enough well-paying jobs (copywriter, creative, real estate agent, retail manager, etc. like in the US) like in the US for people with generic qualifications like English literature, etc. One way out for people with those qualifications was to write banking or governmental entrance exams for jobs. But these too leaned quantitative and had math components making them harder for liberal arts graduates.

From what I've heard from the few people I've met from USSR and China, the situation was similar there too.
Fantastic to hear. I've never (as an employee) found it fair that I would be paid more or less for the same work just because I happened to chose somewhere else to live.
Scientists come up with groundbreaking results in Statistical Physics
Look, I finish this discussion with you with this post.

You may view the world quite differently, or maybe surprisingly like me, but pointing out that your style does not help you to have a dialogue with people with different opinions does not count as finger pointing in my opinion.

But one advise I think I should share with you: If you believe you are right in some topic, and others may not agree with you, you should not use harsh words, but rational ones. You should listen to them, consider their points, give credit where they are right, and reason where they are not right. This is called dialogue, and it usually helps to mutually better understand a topic, and usually leads to better solutions to problems, than shouting FUCK THIS! FUCK THAT! FUCK YOU! to everything we don't agree with, as usually both parties have partial truths in disagreements.

Fun fact: I did not express any particular opinion on the topic, as it does not actually effect me (I don't live or work in the USA, and currently do not wish to move there, but not for reasons about the policies of the government)

What I expressed (it seems you have read my comments even less than you say I have read them), is that what you were trying to express is the popular opinion on HN, and your style will cause net-negative votes for you, not your opinion.

To sum up, stop acting like an angsty teen, and consider the following:

Le style, c'est l'homme

Best Regards,
Your not-own-comment-reading childish finger-pointing Benefactor
Suppression of whistle-blowers is a different crime and certainly isn't concentrated in Wall Street or even private industry (see Snowden, Uber).
So we are counting voters that don't vote now?