skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have just submitted a post related to this. I wonder if those with a lot of power and money are worried because AI applied to economic and redistribution can reach a sound conclusion about another way to trade or use economy that would go against the best interest of those with huge money and power. For people starving or with a lot of problems AI can be a good thing, for people controlling huge power and money AI is a more serious threat, because it can change the status quo before the winner get it all.
not at all a bashism

$ uname -sr
OpenBSD 6.0
$ ps T
PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND
85828 pc Ssp 0:00.01 -ksh (ksh)
34802 pc R+p 0:00.00 ps -T
$ echo $(( 1 + 2 ))
3
Britain is not a nation, it is an island, so the question doesn't really make sense to ask. It's impossible to be English, Welsh or Scottish and not be British; you can't choose geography.
No, they're not. They're a temporary hack.

I really believe that engineers live with the belief that "We can work around politics or route around corruption" that only makes us better off. There are many more people who don't have the knowledge to work around it. No amount of engineering is going to educate or move a change in policy. You're essentially saying "I've got mine, so fuck you."

With that being said, given that VPNs are the only practical chance until the software developers of the world start running for Congress, I have gone ahead and paid ipredator for the next two years.
"and as somebody who sees the DNA damage in whole genome sequencing of lung cancers from smokers, boy is he ever stupidly wrong there"

Hm, but does the dna in those lungs look much different, than the lungs of nonsmoking people with lungcancer?
(Seriously asking)
Firefox Test Pilot [1] is a more recent approach to testing new UI in Firefox. It's entirely extension based. I think this is a smart approach because it lets Mozilla quickly test new UI features without building it into the core browser before it's been vetted.

However its full potential is not ready yet, since Firefox has been migrating to WebExtensions, and this has not fully stabilized yet. Long term I think the WebExtensions move also makes sense, since it gives extension authors a stable API to work with, instead of XUL which can break with each Firefox update. And the architecture makes it easier to optimize threading performance and some form of security sandboxing.

So the point is, I think more UI experimentation is on Firefox's horizon, but they have to first stabilize the technical architecture before they can go full throttle on that.

[1]: https://testpilot.firefox.com/
I think you're thinking about this too hard. It's a subjective question, and will be colored by your experience.
> a surprisingly large amount of defectors actually defect back to DPRK.

Do you have source for this?

A typical north korean escaping to china usually has the option of becoming a slave/wife to a chinese farmer. I would assume that was still a better option during 'arduous march' days but have things imporved that much since then ?
> I'm just frustrated by the stupidity of the whole thing.

Join the club. I did not believe that May would be silly enough to push this through as far as she has, it's like watching someone aim a gun at their feet and pulling the trigger in slow motion.

She won't be remembered kindly.

The UK spent decades pulling itself out of the slump it was in in the mid 80's of the last century, now it is rushing as fast as it can to repeat the experience.

The only silver lining I can see here is that if once brexit is a fact the rejoining could happen rapidly after the Scots break away from the union and England and Wales (and possibly Northern Ireland) realize that it's not working out. But say goodbye to the pound and any exceptions the UK has right now in that case.

It's an own goal if there ever was one.

And no worries about being snarky, it's totally understandable, fortunately I'm on this side of the channel where the impact will be spread out. If I had my eggs in the UK basket I would be a lot less agreeable than merely snarky.
My impression is that people who think climate change is a hoax (or a fashionable delusion) see the benefit to climate scientists and climate activists mainly in terms of money and power: we fund them more or give them political power because they say that they are saving us from catastrophe, maybe much as military leaders gain money and power by promising to defend us from foreign threats. (Maybe sometimes those foreign threats really exist and other times they are imagined or exaggerated, and maybe it's hard to be sure which are which if you're not a military leader yourself, or maybe even if you are.)

I work for an NGO that works on very different issues, and it's clearly important and valuable to us that our supporters agree that the threats we try to mitigate are serious and important. Otherwise, they wouldn't want to pay for our work.

You could also think of medical researchers in a similar way: there is such a thing as a career in medical research because they think both that some diseases are terrible and that there's some possibility that understanding them will be helpful. Apparently this is usually true (e.g., antibiotics, vaccines, medical diagnostics, transplants, ...) but there are presumably some areas that don't make progress and there could be a sociological, economic, or ethical debate about how well researchers can identify when they're not on a fruitful path. I heard some depressing contrarian suggestions that current cancer research may never find a "cure for cancer" because each cancer may, for some purposes, be effectively a distinct disease from each other cancer.

A lot of people in our society have gone pretty far down some rabbit hole or other developing specialized skills and knowledge that aim at saving people from different kinds of urgent problems. An optimistic view of science, or of our society in general, says that typically those skills actually exist and can actually be acquired and practiced; a pessimistic view fears that many of them are, maybe unintentionally, forms of quackery.
Use a Mini PCI-E 3G Card with USB Instead
Do grab the CBC Ideas interview with Pirsig, as a podcast. Actually, this excerpts that original Ideas interview: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-motorcycle-is-yourself-1.2...

Terrible philosophical reasoning, yet plenty of relevance, and an interesting person, no question.
> Can I just sell my data?

That's the real issue here IMO. It blows my mind that Comcast et al thinks it's unfair that Google, Facebook, etc get to profit off of user data while they can not. I get that most politicians don't have the slightest understanding of tech, but how hard is it to understand that Google, Facebook et al get this access because they provide a service for nearly free with the cost being your personal information.

Comcast, Verizon, etc. sells a service that consumers purchase. Now they are increasing the costs by profiting off of our personal data while giving users nothing in return. Ironically, this gives them an unfair advantage. These corporate welfare queens don't have to compete by providing a service that I would pay for with my personal information.
Suggested reading: Living On Almost Nothing In America http://www.twodollarsaday.com/
http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/counties/SanFranciscoCounty....
There's a BBC Horizon episodes with two identical twins, one goes for the low fat diet and the other for low carb diet to test which one is worse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03t8r4h
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1amh2t_bbc-horizon-sugar-v...
We know the models are imperfect. Isn't that why the Monte Carlo method exists? Also, I have the strong impression Adams is aware of that and chooses not discuss it much with his readers.
> Microsoft did cut the price of Windows to get people to adopt it early on because they would be making so much money from Office

If that's true (and that's not my understanding) they did it to gain marketshare and maximize profit, not because they already had enough profit. In that scenario, they cut the price of Windows to make even more from Office.
On the first point I mean that the policy creators (in this case the Commission) can make any policy of their choosing. The veto-ers (i.e. the European Parliament) can only block the legislation. As the former control what gets debated, they frame the debate and the latter can only react.

On the second point; you may in a narrow technical sense be correct. Taking the Uk as an example, the UK Cabinet is literally appointed by the PM. However the wider point is that the executive power of the PM and the ruling party is granted by winning an election based on a manifesto etc. The PM and cabinet members are also individually elected to their seats.

In contrast, the Commission is more akin to the Civil Service.

On your final point, that's a far cry from being elected by a voting public. Also I presume there are restrictions on who can stand for Commission President?
West badly needs not surrendering Gen IV development & commercialisation to Russia and China, for geopolitics reasons and Pu stockpile re-use. Westinghouse is a chip here, a prestigious one for sure, and Gov should step in. Time to drop the energy free-market drivel and act as a superpower in a world that is dangerously going towards aggressive local superpowers. Risk! game scenarios again.
Interesting experiment . . . I'd love to see an update a month or so in.
> including the latest Vue hype

I don't see anything here exceeding the hype on React...
So true. It's easy to forget this point. Do the math:

Take all the content available to a cable subscriber, and the money that goes into producing that content. Take out the ads and split the bill (in addition to the relatively low costs of operating/maintaining the cable company itself) among the subscribers. That's just covering costs; now add a bit of profit to motivate those companies to stay in business.

There's no question you'd be paying more - a lot more. We just don't think the ads are saving us money because we don't know any different - that's just the way TV has been since the beginning.
The court doesn't enforce that the woman spends all the child support money. So if you get impregnated by a rich enough man it can certainly be a meal ticket for life.
Maybe, if they do not find anything, they could use lucene ;)
it does a pretty good job with "sudo make me a sandwich" =)

http://explainshell.com/explain?cmd=sudo+make+me+a+sandwich
>> but it's all ultimately explicit rule-following.

Doesn't it fall into the problem of "you can't teach a machine to swim"? meaning that all we can fairly judge is whether the result would have been considered creative if done by a human ?
I also tried a command with xargs, it seemed to do a pretty good job: http://explainshell.com/explain?cmd=find+.+-type+f+-print0+%...
Agreed. If you dilute a single employee's equity by any amount, you do not deserve to have that employee. Period.
"Why doesn't the article explore starting up in different geographies?"

Honestly, because most VCs are insanely lazy, and have no interest in traveling anywhere outside the Bay Area to do stuff.
Tower of Babylon was superb, I read it with the other short stories (can't remember the name of the collection) a month or so ago.

Wasn't so sure about the rest of them though, I felt the Babylon story kind of eclipsed all of them.
Insanity? That's dirt cheap. Think about how much mechanical complexity goes into each door, how it has multiple motors, servos, linear actuators and such. It has to be safe when closed, and it has to be safe when opened, it can't spontaneously shut in someone's face or pin them in the middle.

It needs multiple sensors that can handle being exposed to a lot of wear and tear. It needs to operate for years on end with, ideally, very little maintenance. It has to endure being buffeted by the forces of the train entering and leaving the station which exerts significant strain on any hinges or track mechanisms.

So you need a pair of these for each set of doors on the train, and if each car has three doors, and you have eight cars, that's 48 doors.

That leaves you with only $20,800 per door. You still need to build the walls themselves and you need to have this installed by the right technicians.

Do the math, don't bitch just because it sounds expensive.
"The Hard SF Renaissance" is one of my favorites and usually sits on my coffee table when I don't have it loaned out to friends.
Stealth update to enemy power causes an uproar in World of Warcraft
Ask HN: How do you decorate a SW office?
What things could you buy to add some nerdness to an office for SW engineers, other than geeky posters? Any idea?
A teardown of the components and why it's so reliable might be interesting.
It's funny that you (and many others) say this because we had this from 1996 to roughly 2004. Unbundled last element, or linesharing, was a requirement of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Telcos loathed it and pitched many mighty fits and threw every (physical and metaphorical) wrench they could in front of their brand new competitors. But it worked, in spite of the problems[0]. The absolute best I ever had was in Southwestern Bell territory. Over a single copper circuit I could choose from TEN different ISPs. Speakeasy, Megapath, Covad Direct, August Net, and a handful more that I can't remember. In 2002, I paid Speakeasy $160/month for 10mbps symmetrical with 8 real IP addresses and no port blocking.

President Bush was elected and the telcos' complaints were given new life at the new FCC. The unbundling requirements were swiftly removed. Now, we have this.

0 - And don't get me wrong, the problems were legion. UNE-P didn't apply to cable providers nor the new-ish fiber optic last mile buildouts. Only ILECs were subject to it so competitive providers who had built physical plants got to skate by. And there were some legitimate complaints over the "profit margin" calculation (in quotes because what's a margin in the telco business, really?). But, damn, it did work for a brief time...
I think there are several quality metrics for gauging societal improvement:
- healthcare access and outcome statistics
- poverty & homelessness statistics
- education levels
- access to clean water in sufficient quantity
- access to healthful foods in sufficient quantity
- levels of environmental contaminants
- delta in income of top and bottom economic tiers

And so on. Toss in a few bullet points intended to flag totalitarian/authoritarian/fascist tendencies, worker exploitation, and the like and I think that while likely not a comprehensive blueprint that's more than enough to get started. Especially considering how poorly so many industrialized, first world, "democratic" countries in the world do on so many of these basics.

That said I agree there's no ROI on improving household items like clocks. The problem is there's also no obvious ROI on resolving homelessness.
I'm sure you read the article, which indicated that Chapter 11 is what's being used. In the US, companies always go for Chapter 11 if it looks like it's going to work, i.e. that there's a viable business in there somewhere. In Westinghouse's case, the viable business is everything other than their civilian reactor construction business.
> The main admin login credentials are simply “admin” with your AWS assigned Instance-ID as the password.

There's got to be a better way to do this... right?
Ubuntu 17.04 what's new in unity 8
For those wanting to embrace the "devalue your data" idea, I suggest uMatrix. High granularity for which resources your browser executes (cookie, css, images, plugins, scripts, xhr, and frames) from where (domain, subdomains, third parties).
> The biggest externality of coal in particular is not carbon emissions but the massive health costs and human suffering

The carbon emissions cause climate change, which causes human suffering at a scale, as I understand it, far beyond that of the pollution you describe (which is also substantial).
I wrote so much code on that damned thing that I didn't get schoolwork done.

Was very sad when a classmate stole it from me.
Who said anything about freedom of speech?
Two things: First, Cuba is different because the Castro regime is in fact going to fall, soon. It just waits for one old man (Raul Castro) to die. After that comes... something else. North Korea won't fall like that if the "Dear Leader" produces children, because they've somehow become a hereditary Communist dictatorship.

Second, the difference between Denmark and the US is massively less than the difference between South and North Korea, so that comparison doesn't prove your point as well as you think.
check out sshuttle for one cool way to do it
You know it’s gone to far when recruiters give you cheatsheets to the interview
I'm going to object to the "more or less what the tool user intends it to". Our economy and political system is chockfull with examples of unintended consequences. Both majority parties are guilting of this.
You know what they say, "the 'S' in IoT stands for security."
I think I've identified my confusion.

I had interpreted the original post to be a comparison of the levels of physical danger in manufacturing vs. service industry jobs. From my perspective both programming and retail are service industry jobs since they don't involve creating physical products by hand or through the use of tools.
Idiosyncratic Ruby
This is how I see it: Post-primaries, I think Hillary was a much better candidate. However a large number of liberals chose to campaign for her by just straight up calling the other side racists, while ignoring her flaws / blaming them on Russians. (We are all flawed, just accept it and don't blame it on others, otherwise you might just come across as narcissistic). In the case this was done in a false-flag fashion, then the democrats didn't catch it / didn't do the obvious thing to combat it. I mean come on guys.

It is likely true that there 'are' lots of racist / deplorable voters however it is analogous to this: If I were fat, I would probably not like people yelling "hey fattie! / run forrest run" at me while I am out jogging trying to improve myself. In the end, although I did not vote for Trump, (and am not fat), it did kind of seem to me that Democrats / liberals during this election, came across (regardless of whether they actually are, which I strongly doubt) as the gang from globo-gym, and I can just picture an image of a White Goodman (Ben Stiller's character) calling the other side 'deplorable.'

(To Hillary's credit she seemed very apologetic during the second of the three debates)

Add to this exchanges like the one between Podesta / Assange [1] which just served to reinforce this image, and you have a recipe for the election upset which happened.

I am sure at the end of the day there will be some voters you cannot reach, but I imagine, if you just use basic human empathy, it will reach a whole lot of people.

The moral of this story, for either side, should be:

1. Don't treat the other side poorly / call them names. Instead, use reasoning about policies, compassion, and acceptance of your own flaws to win voters.

2. Be wary of possible false-flag tactics- no one has brought up evidence that this happened, but I wouldn't be at all surprised.

3. Don't rely solely on things like this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11...

humans are not machines to feed variables and get out votes- use actual compassion / empathy/ and talk to people. Or maybe, smarter, don't rely solely on your super algorithm sauce - obviously data analysis will help, but it shouldn't be the whole picture.

[1] http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/301069-podesta-fires...
It's really a shame. Some fields are undergoing reproducibility crises at the moment, and I'd expect there are innumerable questions that you could survey those communities about, only to return with a strong but irreproducible consensus. Peer review is hard enough without challenging the status quo, and peer review has demonstrated itself to be an incomplete mechanism for science (short term, at least, and we need climate action in the short term). With that in mind, red teams sound great.

However, when doing anything statistical, there are questions you can debate before and after you collect data, and that distinction is incredibly relevant here. Having a red team push back against methodology while no-one has yet seen the data sounds great. But if you have a red team supporting your methodology before you collect data, only to challenge it based on the conclusions, you're basically endorsing using your "researcher degrees of freedom" to push in a particular direction, and it's terrible. It's p-hacking with an agenda. It's oxymoronic to ask people to do science that leads to specific conclusions, and that feels like where this is going.
I am a fan; I am very happy people make the time to do this kind of research. Looking forward to testing!
As far I am aware Google doesn't operates as a data broker ("We do not sell your personal information to anyone." - https://privacy.google.com/how-ads-work.html), so comparing what Google does with ISPs selling PII associated with traffic to any third-party is in my opinion, no offense, a bit absurd. Not trying to defend Google neither: I don't support the way they use user's data, which is why I use DuckDuckGo, but I don't think this comparison (which was used by the Republicans) is valid.
It's simpler in Vienna though because they have a proof of payment system. You just need one elevator to the platform. In NY, you need one to the turnstiles, and then another one to the platform.
I lived in Orlando for eight years. I find Florida an ecologically fascinating place. It's the only corner of the continental US that has an honest-to-God jungle climate, which makes it an unusual island in North America that is amenable to non-native species from many parts of South America, Africa, and Asia.

On top of that, Florida has a weird cultural history around exoticism. Florida used to be be a little slice of overseas tropical paradise that car-bound American vacationers could still get to. The kind of people who settled in Florida often came for that, or played it up. You had people owning all sorts of unusual exotic pets and fish. And, then, inevitably, they get discarded when the owners realize that, oops, that cute little baby python is now big enough to eat the family dog.

Drive around in south Florida, and you may run into swamp eels, snakehead, walking catfish, pacu, grass carp bigger than toddlers, hordes of lionfish blanketing reefs, Cuban treefrogs, cane toads, caiman, basilisks, chameleons, iguanas, geckos, nile monitors (up to five feet long), boas (ten feet), Burmese pythons (the largest was 17 feet!), ibises, parrots, macaws, cockatoos, parakeets, toucans, macaques, monkeys, and capybaras.

So now, strangely, Florida has actually become the exotic enclave the locals tried to emulate with their non-native pets. It increasingly feels like another world.
I can't tell if your first sentence is implying that you did follow this saga over the past few years, but if so it's very strange that someone who professes to be intimate with the details here would leave out that the reason they couldn't deliver on planned budgets and schedules was massive accounting fraud, not a failure in their engineering or product management.
Low income people also would prefer spam and coolaid every single meal instead of starving - that doesn't mean it should be promoted as a good diet...