skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In the sense that it is a normative belief that mystics are special, and that there are only a few people who experience it, lots of people are not mystics.

How can you possibly know that there are "only a few people" who have mystic experience? The sign of a 'realized' mystic is not but 'silence'. As for the rest of us, we advertise and some even manage to make a business out of it :)

> As far as it is "news", there is a normative belief that homosexuality is something only certain people possess.

That was clearly in reference to your Kundalini remark. I addressed the specific repression elsewhere. Nor did I confuse a carnal act with spiritual love.

> What you are saying doesn't make sense. He was in the process of the integration. There is no such thing as being prepared or not be prepared. When it happens, it happens.

Integration happens like "a bolt of lightning". That is the journey's end. And the journey most assuredly requires "preparation":

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25&vers...
Russia's goal is fragmenting the US. Just as the US did to the Soviet Union. Turnabout is fair play, no?
Can you elaborate? As stands your logic makes absolutely no sense.
“When you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime.”

— Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, in an interview with NBC News on September 25, 2016.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/25/gen_flynn_...
it's sort of strange that a mainstream candidate with enough support to win the whole election is considered controversial, plenty public figures endorsed hilary and none received the level of backlash that palmer did. max temkin even funded a similarly cringey billboard campaign:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-09-23-report-oculus-r...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-15-anti-trump-ad-a...

unless we are to enforce a standard of public apoliticism for public figures across the board, uniquely singling out endorsements on one side regardless of wealth doesn't seem like a good way to generate effective discourse
Give it a few years...
It doesn't matter that adultery isn't a crime: you're being questioned by the police, and any answer has the possibility of including details which might seem incriminating for whatever they're actually investigating, regardless of your innocence.

It seems like you're approaching the 5th amendment as a direct point/counterpoint arrangement: the police accuse you of robbing a bank, you know you didn't because you were cheating on your spouse, you can't take the 5th because cheating on your spouse isn't a crime, so you must answer "I couldn't have robbed the bank because I was cheating on my spouse at another location".

But the amendment is much broader than that. Since you don't know what other information the police are attempting to validate or even what crimes they're aware of, you have no way to know if "I was at $hotel with $other_person at $time" may incriminate you in this case or some other case.
Sometimes It Really Is the Cover-Up
You can close a branch, which makes it stop appearing in the UI unless you explicitly ask for closed branches. You can never fully delete a branch since the branch is part of the commit metadata (as it should be, IMO).
> I think asserting the primacy of a domain model over a relational model - in particular, an OO domain model - is a recipe for pain, especially in a polyglot world.

It's unfortunate that, in common usage, "domain model" basically means "OO domain model". Relational model, one which properly reflects your domain, is most certainly as worthy of that name as an OO one.

We can, of course, debate if simply sharing relational database among multiple applications is good architecture. It very well might not be, due to missing intermediate layer that can absorb schema changes, provide caching, etc. Or due to crappiness of languages used to write stored procedures and databases generally not being great application servers (although PostgreSQL seems to be getting there...)

But it is not because relational model is not a "domain model".
Yeah, I think it's not that you're focused on your one field, just that some people have the curiosity to look into things and appreciate the work being done; some people have that for their field only; and some people just don't give a crap at all about things that don't directly affect them.
Yes, was russia involved in fake news.

Yes, did Russia hackthe DNC.

More importantly. Who knew what, and when. Members of Trumps team had contact with Russia. Flynn already resigned over this. Sessions has had to recuse himself because of this. Nunes has engaged in questionable behaviour over this. Manafort had some sort of business relationship with a powerful Russian close to Putin.

There is a dossier from a "credible" source that indicates the Russians have dirt on Trump.

realistically, the question seems to be if Trump (or his team) encouraged Russian influence in the election in exchange for reducing sanctions or other favours.

That is a big deal.
Depends on the jurisdiction. It is a crime in some places.
Actually, I didn't find it civil to be accused of "causing harm to people with mental illness" by "ignorantly linking violence to mental illness."

I don't think it's ignorant to ask the question if someone who did that is right in the head.
I don't think capitalism itself is the problem. Capitalism is basically just a policy of individual freedom extended to control of production, which honestly is hard to argue with. The main problem in my mind is that as a culture we've bought into the mistaken notion that more goods and services mean more happiness. Of course, this notion is primarily the result of the capitalist propaganda machine we call advertising. If we restricted advertising it would do a lot to tame the beast. Another problem is that we've walled everything off, so if you want to live you need to play the capitalist game. People should be able to opt out if they want.

That being said, while I'm mostly pro-capitalism, I'm also in favor of income redistribution. Happiness from wealth has hardcore diminishing returns, and visible inequality directly creates unhappiness. Based on these facts, significant income redistribution is really a moral imperative.
That was one of the many dubious allegations doing the rounds, certainly. There were two major problems with it. Firstly, the supposed "dropping of sanctions" a month after Trump took power didn't actually happen. The thing people claimed was dropping the sanctions was actually a small technical change that merely allowed US exporters to pay fees required to export goods that the sanctions weren't intended to block: http://www.snopes.com/trump-sanctions-russias-intelligence-a...

Secondly, the claim that the Russian government offered Trump a share of Rosneft came from a really dodgy dossier. Supporters of the dossier touted the fact that it correctly predicted the percentage of Rosneft share sold as proof the source had inside knowledge, but it was in fact public knowledge that the Russian government wanted to sell that percent of Rosneft and had been reported in Bloomberg a few weeks before the supposed source mentioned it. So it's all too plausible that the source was merely combining public information with what the person paying them wanted to hear.
Not quite: https://twitter.com/SpaceBrendan/status/847599001746644996
Dennett claims that he himself is unconscious. Not someone I'd look to for advice on anything, really.
Where "realtime" here means "live" or "event-driven" maybe.
Let me counter with this quote.

If we acknowledge that a physical theory of mind must account for the subjective character of experience, we must admit that no presently available conception gives us a clue how this could be done. The problem is unique. If mental processes are indeed physical processes, then there is something it is like, intrinsically, to undergo certain physical processes. What it is for such a thing to be the case remains a mystery.

I think the critical point in your quote is the last sentence.

The reason is that every subjective phenomenon is essentially connected with a single point of view, and it seems inevitable that an objective, physical theory will abandon that point of view.

Sure, my experience of looking at a red object is fundamentally my experience, but there seems to be no obvious reason why we could not abstract me away and talk about the experience of an arbitrary human seeing a red object. This is also in line with the suggestions at the very end, trying to develop the tools to talk about experiences in an objective manner.
I'm with you - I wrote one for the IIGS. I'd leave it running overnight and have a pretty picture in the morning!
Jurisdiction appears to be Federal for this case.
This is a story based on speculation early last week that turned out to be false.

https://twitter.com/JeffPohjola/status/847597736803225600
> The major allegation on the table right now is that the Russian government offered Trump a sizeable share of Rosneft

What? Where are you getting that from (that it's "the major allegation")? It was just one of many claims in the Steele Dossier.

IIRC, in the Steele dossier, that stake in Rosneft (~15% or something?) was offered to Trump and he turned it down. That stake continued to be shopped around and recently was bought by a joint venture between Qatar and others, and some of the buyers can't be identified.

TBH, I'm not really sure why Trump would need to relieve sanctions in order to get a stake in this, as it's clear they've been shopping it around for a while.
Conquer, among other definitions, means "to overcome by force; subdue". It's not limited to invading armies.
According to that link federal courts defer to state law rules on the issue for causes of action that sound in state law but not for those that are grounded in federal law. Google's complaint (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7dzPLynxaXuQjY3dkllZ2ZKb0k...) has two CA claims and four federal ones. The main trade secret claims are one of each.

Again, according to that link, if evidence is relevant to both federal and state claims, the federal rule controls. So in this case I expect the federal negative inference rule to prevail.
not to mention that a git branch is NOT your typical VCS branch. It's an ephemeral named head, nothing more than a tag (that lives outside of the normal tag interface).
A guy with a high net worth, that may have taken secrets from Google then sold them to Uber? It'd be very surprising if he didn't have his own legal team.

One would imagine part of Uber's tactic would have been to make sure that they got representations on paper that everything was safe, that no secrets were being passed. If I was buying contraband, I'd want to make sure the invoices I officially paid for looked legit...
Central Planning and the Fall of the US Empire (2011))
Oh I bet it's because they ran the VM programs straight out of ROM. This is saves more than compressing and then wasting precious RAM on them. Not an issue on the PC.
Only if they paid you to do it. Keeping records of that stuff has side benefit of spotting whose full of shit. In any case, there might be an exception for blog authors who aren't celebrities because they won't have the effect of a corporate, media campaign. Huge difference between paid ads everywhere vs some bloggers talking. What you describe is already happening against major candidates but didn't change the election. Those paying to win got furthest with one winning.

Hence my focus on cutting the pay or payments.
Thanks for the tip about that documentary. You can watch it on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk6QU94xAb8
Basically we're looking at Trump being connected to Russian mafia for all his financing as well as Putin bribing him with 19% stake in the Russian state oil company for removing sanctions, as well as assisting with his campaign by hacking into the Podesta emails, sorta like how there were Watergate DNC office burglars.

Did you want all this in writing from Trump and notarized that he did this? Because that's not how it works. His job is to say he didn't do this.
I have to admit that at this point, I'd just like to see somebody, somewhere, convicted of something, in a way that carries some sort of real consequences (i.e., no "yep, they're guilty, and the penalty is to retire from the public eye with all their ill-gotten gains and enjoying them until the day they die, except maybe if they take a break to write a book about their experiences for a couple million dollars" crap).

Think about it. When's the last time that happened at this level? Why should anyone at that level be concerned about a FBI investigation, or a Congressional probe, or anything else? When's the last time that amounted to anything at all?

I honestly don't hardly care who or which side of what aisle they are on. I do very much care that it be an accurate conviction, but that seems to be a target-rich environment right now.
The house side is a disaster right now. Nunes is the chair of the committee and his behaviour so far is very concerning. Specifically he went ot the white house to obtain information from staffers, then briefed Trump on it and went to the press before he went to his own committee. this from a man who was a part of Trumps team.

Edit: If you're downvoting because I'm wrong please correct me. If it's just because you don't like what I said then carry on I guess.
This. I feel like the biggest problems in EdTech are Bret Victoresque. The problem with fetch isn't that the software and technology isn't user friendly enough. The problem is that most EdTech is fundamentally X-but on a computer. Write an essay, but on the computer. Create a presentation, but on the computer.

Technology needs to facilitate student learning in new, better ways, not just be paper version 1.1.

Even this low bar often trips up EdTech companies. Why is my lesson planning webapp still broken on mobile after 5 years? Why does my digital grade book require some many clicks to do anything? Why does Google classroom still not have a student view for teachers?
> You'd also invoke the fifth if your testimony could appear to be self-incriminating.

That's true in theory. In practice, there are few cases where invoking the fifth appears less incriminating than speaking.

As you said, the legal is run by humans, and humans tend to view invoking the fifth as suspicious.
>I can't wait until I have a talk with my kids when they realize the significance of this day

https://goo.gl/photos/7rT5rxvsP9AxVZxn6

My four year old daughter, watching the launch with rapt attention.

When we watched the Echostar 23 launch two weeks ago, she asked why it didn't land... Crazy that rockets landing is already totally normal for her.
One of the authors of this piece posted an amusing court transcript on Twitter: https://twitter.com/mikeisaac/status/847568150916878336
The level of blind condescension required to make a comment like that....

It's really easy to call out the losers once they fail.

You call this delusional because you fail to factor in the scope of the opportunity. The food industry is enormous. If the founding team and investors believed they had a mere 1% shot at disrupting it, spending $100M to run the experiment is entirely rational.

I feel the need to leave a quote here in the hopes of deterring other people from espousing your attitude.

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. "
There are several reasons: adventure, incentivize cheaper space travel, drastically improve humanity's chance at survival.

Waitbutwhy has an amazing explanation of the how's and why's.

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/08/how-and-why-spacex-will-coloni...
Also here's the Feynman algorithm[1]:

- Write down the problem.

- Think real hard.

- Write down the solution.

This article not only falling for survivorship bias but also confirmation bias [2]

1: http://wiki.c2.com/?FeynmanAlgorithm
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
> Not at all. Most customers couldn't care less about money.

you're out of your mind.

customers at the high end care MORE about money, not less. the company spending $1 million/month on AWS is desperately looking for ways out. DESPERATELY. their entire business is being held hostage by amazon. jeff bezos has them by the balls and is squeezing harder and harder by the day. they have hired consultants to do the analysis, they have hired operations VPs to get them out, but they are failing. they are failing, and shoveling even more money to AWS every week, or their business goes dark.

they are doing this because one side of their business (doing stuff) is outpacing their intelligence on the other side (paying for infrastructure to do stuff). this is the genius of amazon. this is why they are successful. amazon can arbitrage this opportunity better than anyone else currently.

how do i know? i compete with amazon and talk to customers on a weekly basis. they are desperate. they woke up one day and are are now sending their entire profit margin to jeff bezos. every single CFO is thinking about it. how panicked are they?

you could cut their bill in half and they still wouldn't do it. they're scared, like a deer in the headlights. they don't know what to do. what if they make a wrong decision? ohhhhh my goddddddddd but... let's do nothing and keep our jobs. that's the reality. meanwhile, s3 can go down for half a day, and amazon doesn't even really have to acknowledge it. becuase what are the customers going to do? MOVE? LOL! you might as well ask them to build a time machine.

that is real. people live in that reality. sometimes against their will. people care about costs, and try hard, and all of those nice things, but they will soon be losers because jeff bezos is just BETTER at business than they are. jeff bezos is literally being paid by the people he is about to put out of business at the application level, and they're happy to pay him to do it. it's amazing. it truly is.

here's the problem: more people know how to click a button on console.aws.amazon.com than to migrate and operate an entire site. people simply do not have the skills. they just don't. they don't know how the internet actually works, but they're operating a business on the internet. they're dumb. amazon capitalized on that, good for them.

maybe the era where needing to actually knowing how the internet works is over. i don't know.
Australian Regulators Prevent Banks from Collectively Bargaining over Apple Pay
omg that's better than the original post. AirBnB appears to be completely insincere in their responses to this customer.
Atheism may be defined as materialism, but more precisely it means the belief or knowledge of the non-existence of a creator god or at least a deity overlord.

Most Buddhists are atheists but not materialists. And although materialism and atheism are commonly conflated, they are very different issues, particularly considering non-abrahamic religions or philosophy in the technical sense.
So the alternative is to keep a population held together with a narrative manufactured by the central state along side a brutal military police apparatus to manage compliance.

I think the real culprit is that the masters of the universe who crashed the economy have not been able to put humpty dumpty back together again. And only managed to make the upper 1% fabulously wealthy why the rest of the population has a sinking standard of living and lower long term wealth prospects.

Even tho its ugly what we have now its the best thing that could happen. If the states and regions reassert there rights and set there own policy independent of federal government the result is more power to the state citizens. And a smaller circle of corruption with more accountability.

And if the Russians are involved then they have complete control of both federal parties because the main source of friction comes directly out of the ideology of both parties that use division to try to segregate the electorate and practice scorched earth on the other side.
Yes, this is great fun. I have a few paper designs of my own in a similar spirit and if you look around you'll find many existing projects.

However the "Min-T" name to me implies a higher ambition than "just" implementing a transistor computer. True minimalism requires exacting definitions and metrics. That could be pretty interesting, but keeping memory outside the definition is in a sense cheating as [the size and speed of] random access memory was a key differentiators between early computers (ENIAC era).

Essentially, this design would be facing the same constraints as _early_ computers, so I would expect the solution to look similar: micro-coded bit-serial design, Rope memory for ROM, and core memory for "ram". I'd look to the HP-1900A for inspiration.
It's funny. I regularly watch crime documentaries and am a big supporter of my rights (I am a US citizen) and detest that people are assumed to be guilty and that is largely how our legal system works. I like to believe I am decent at filtering out useful knowledge from the media.

But my first thought when I saw this headline was "oh fuck - that's bad"

Emotions are so good at getting in the way of critical thinking. And nowadays I think most people admit that they read headlines first, then comments, and then maybe (but probably not) the story. I wonder how horribly skewed my worldview is because of how I digest information.
Sort of depends on the details, some of which we don't know (we don't know actual internal costs, for example, only external prices which include markup). Here's some quick napkin math though:

We know the price of a Falcon 9 launch is about $65 million, and we know that the hardware cost of the first stage is about 3/4 of the total hardware cost. Assuming everything has the same profit margin markup that puts the effective price of the first stage at $49 million. They've said they think they can do 10 launches per booster core, if so that puts the amortized price at only $4.9 million per flight. Add the $16 million for the 2nd stage and that gives you a ballpark figure of $21 million per flight with the same profit percentages they have today. Add a few million dollars per flight for operational overhead and the cost of other components and you're probably not far off a reasonable estimate for what they could offer, let's call it $25 million just to be safe. At 22,800 kg to LEO, that's $1000 per kg ($500/lb). How much lower that could go depends on how much profit margin SpaceX would want to shave off and how much overhead they have for reuse.

In comparison, the industry standard Ariane 5 can do roughly $8k per kg to LEO, the Atlas V is similar, the Proton is about $4k/kg.
I agree that this the last thing I would check. An application can work perfectly find with some functions not optimized. In fact, I have find unoptimized functions in node.js itself last week in the streams abstractions.

Regarding performance of node.js applications I often find myself looking at my cpu profiles and memory dumps in node-inspector because the most common problems are eventloop starvation, memory leaks or long GC pauses.
I will wait to find out more information. Seems him seeking "immunity" isnt what happened in a legal sense from what I have read.
Nothing like having a really good lawyer. /s