skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>We have been transported back to the early 20th century

>Brandeis wanted to eliminate monopolies, because (in the words of his biographer Melvin Urofsky) “in a democratic society the existence of large centers of private power is dangerous to the continuing vitality of a free people.”

>Brandeis generally opposed regulation — which, he worried, inevitably led to the corruption of the regulator

Reading American Economic History has given me the idea that problems of corruption were taken more seriously in the past than they are today -- which this article seems to be alluding to.

It seems to be an issue that isn't circulating today. I've never heard of someone mention Andrew Jackson with reference to how fiercely he seemed to want to fight against corruption. Lincoln gave the banks the finger and instead, empowered congress to take control of the nation's money supply, and won a war in which the banks had been betting against him by doing this. By contrast, it seems today people view big banks as a kind of mandatory evil that we should just shut up about and tolerate.

Further, it does appear that most politicians, especially Presidents, must be subservient to the interests of lobbies and power groups in Washington.

Perhaps also, today we take it for granted that a lot of good sense was taken in the past to build this country.

I have a strong sense that today's political climate and social culture is ignoring growing problems of the bigness described in the article--concentrations of power. I have heard a lot of people say everything is corrupt, it doesn't matter, which at least in my reading, appears to have not been the case in the past. If that is true, I'm not sure if America would look the same today if it wasn't true.
First, at the risk of pissing off fellow emacs-ers -- if you're already a regular Vim user, why not stick to it? It's a great editor, and I know a lot of people who use it and are just as productive as I am with emacs. Plus, if anyone ever needs to use their computer, you won't get weird looks when you tell them Caps Lock is Control on your keyboard...

Anyway, if you absolutely want to learn something else, I'd suggest going the other way 'round, really: start with something minimal and work your way up from there.

For the first 1-2 years, I think, I've used Emacs as little more than a glorified Notepad clone (in fact, I even used it with cua-mode). I think my .emacs file was barely ten lines long. I was transitioning to Emacs from nedit, an old-ish Unix editor with a Motif UI that was getting increasingly difficult to digest and kept crashing and had trouble with Unicode and man I'm old... anyway, all I really needed it to do was let me write text and paint it in pretty colors sometimes.

I then sort of picked up its features one by one, as I needed them. The keybindings came first, because it was weird the arrow keys for motion and the other keys for everything else. Then I got a larger monitor and I could fit more than two windows on it and I installed window-mode so that I could switch between windows with M-1, M-2 and so on.

(Please remember this was 2005 or 2006 or something, a 21" CRT was a big deal for me...)

That's pretty much how I picked up everything else: first big C project was how I picked up xrefactory, then xcscope. First time I had to do big merges was how I picked up ediff, and so on.

The best thing about having something as scriptable and customizable as emacs is being able to make it work exactly the way you want it. Making it work exactly the way someone else wants it sort of defeats the purpose, I mean, any editor already works the way someone else wants it.

Edit: ah, yes, to address some of your pain points:

- Remote editing: look into something called tramp-mode. It's not perfect, and I, for one, use it sparingly, but it may fit your use case.

- Weird key combinations: I'm not sure what to say other than "you get used to them". It may be worth looking into how i3 deals with this stuff, too. I no longer use a tiling WM, but when I used ratpoison, it fit near Emacs pretty well -- I bound C-t to Ratpoison's prefix key, and just didn't use C-t for anything in Emacs. But then again, Ratpoison (and its successort, scrotwm) were both written by Emacs enthusiasts, and used similar key sequences.

If you're curious about anything else, ask away :-)
That seems unlikely. Nukes are pretty small on the scale of the earth. Things like plutonium concentration went up significantly because the natural level is so low, but I doubt they did much for aerosols.

A clean nuke detonated over the ocean would do nothing. The whole point would be to produce vast amounts of dust i.e. be dirty.
While I don't think this was related to the init system, I have had a Linux box completely hang while trying to reboot it because an NFS server that it was connected to went away. I'm pretty sure this was an infinite hang as it sat like that for over five days before I could physically get to it to hit the power button.

Hanging during reboot is something that, IMO, should never happen.
The current level of atmospheric CO2 is not unprecedented, but the current rate of change of atmospheric CO2 is. Couple that with massive ecological decimation and biodiversity due to human habitation and it is clear that our current predicament is geologically unprecedented.
I won't ride United again until he's fired as well as others who supported their horrific policies.
Today's tight seating densities have pushed up passenger annoyance levels.

Flying used to be far less complicated. In the 1970s, you could park next to the terminal at SJC, and pay about $15 in cash to fly to LA. The cash register receipt was your boarding pass. There was a plane every hour. No reservations. Every hour, a 727 would roll up outside the waiting area, the built-in rear staircase would lower, and people would get off and on.

Also, here's the PSA stewardess class graduation picture of June 1974.[1]

[1] http://www.jetpsa.com/stewgrad/stewgrad/7406.jpg
Having worked doing independent full-stack web design I'd expect an individual could, from scratch, set up a working system with load balancing and failover in perhaps 2-3 weeks ... an experience team should surely be able to do that in their sleep inside a week?

What would be others expectation for such a service? USPTO do have a web team, yes? That site has been the same for over a decade AFAIR, what have they been doing?
The journey of right someone told me

- do the thing
- do the right thing
- do the right thing the right way
I assumed (without looking) that because of all of the features, the nginx codebase wouldn't be that east to read. I'll give it a try!
It doesn't require Android's death, just the end of it being able to piggyback on the balance sheet of another, arguably independent, division.

In this case, that would mean forcing Android to become independently profitable, rather than a way for GoogleWebApps Inc. to "monopolize" internet endpoints on billions of devices.
I spent a lot of time not getting sports. And deep down I still don't care what all those millionaires do with their balls. Buy having a stake in a tense game between rivals feels awesome. Being surrounded by strangers who love the same thing you love feels awesome. And having common ground with quite a lot of people you meet is nice too. I dismissed so many things because I didn't think they were important. Granted, your followup did clarify that you don't think sports are less valid as an interest than your own things. I don't really seek out sports much, but if I get to watch a game with somebody who cares about it more, I give it my full attention and yell at the screen and/or field as needed, and it's generally a lot of fun.
People who complain about a statistic without mentioning its severity in context are often only using it as rhetorical currency rather than actually caring about the issue itself. If they're accepting of the same outcome in other contexts you can safely ignore them.
(2) WW3 MORE DEAD DUE TO ISLAM ISIS
Well, duh. If I had to pay nothing for water, I would also just run the tap through a radiator all day and save on the AC electricity.

But then I also have a conscience and realize what a gigantic waste that is, so I don't.
One approach would be to spin out the search index and algorithms out of Google, turning it into a B2B service provider that provides (for a fee) an API that everyone could use to provide a search engine. The "remaining" Google could keep working like before, just that they would no longer have their own search technology but would buy API access like anyone else could.

This would address the idea that Internet search has become a monopoly because Google is so dominant and building up your own index and algorithms has become so expensive that no one on the free market can challenge it. (This assumes that Bing is a huge loss maker for Microsoft, Yandex and Baidu can only exist because of government interference against Google in their home markets and all the others like DuckDuckGo are relying on API access provided by these three.)

I am not sure how true this second paragraph really is and I also think there would be quite big efficiency losses by such an approach (e.g. knowing how to search the web might also be helpful for searching your email etc. and such an API model would make it very difficult to use knowledge about the user to influence search results; which is something all the privacy conscious search engines such as DDG struggle with), but at least that's what I have heard people suggest when they want to see Google broken up.
"The view that some scientists have that we need to manipulate the planet in order to fix it is another one that bothers me. We need to be wary of false solutions like geoengineering. I’ve just read a paper that outlines plans to pump cold water into the Arctic to try and refreeze the ice-cap. It’s totally mad! This old style of thinking believes the Earth operates like a machine, but that’s not how natural systems operate."

10 Things You’ve Always Wanted to Ask an Environmental Scientist -- https://medium.com/greenpeace/10-things-youve-always-wanted-...
Presumably she thought the passenger was just being facetious and was going to take the jumper back off as soon as she wasn't looking.

(I saw something like this 3 times on a Delta flight in which there were empty seats and the passengers were asked to not move from their assigned seats until after takeoff due to weight/balance concerns. They asked a passenger to move back, and as soon as the flight attendant turned his head the passenger moved back into the empty seat...this happened 3 times before the flight left the gate. I would have gotten pretty pissed as the flight attendant and was actually pretty impressed by how calmly he handled it.
I want to reject your analogy but it's too damn good :-)
I really think that the intent of the action should be taken into consideration. Also, does anyone know if there are minimum sentences for hacking?
The only true monopoly Google holds is search. They have a lot of successful products in other venues but nothing that reaches 90%+ market penetration. The only other thing that's close is chrome browser.

Chrome is already starting to get some "google only" features...Like hangouts and Chromecast support. If any of these become a necessity to browse regular sites it will be a defacto monopoly on the web browser market.

Random thought, but one reason I don't like Angular is because it "shapes" your site exactly how google wants it. Much like AMP, this just makes it easy for Google to "borrow" your content for other purposes.
The threat of anti-trust to Google is good enough, I hope it's not acted on.

I can guarantee you that someone at Google had studied game theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-credible_threat

Edit: To clarify, a threat must be credible for it to be effective. So a threat is only "good enough" if there is a reasonable chance it will be carried out. For example, you actually have to have nukes and be willing to use them if you threaten to nuke somebody, otherwise they'll just ignore you.
I haven't seen any talk about the health effects of rising CO2.

I know there are studies finding a difference in productivity between 600 and 1000 ppm with just hours of exposure, so isn't it possible that going from 300 globally to over 400 has had some health impact over a lifetime? Is there a point where lower CO2 has no effect and how do we know that?
Ah, I'm Dutch so flying within the country isn't really a thing. The longest train ride possible is about 3,5 hours and goes every hour.

I think that suprises most people :)

Hard to do on a Ryanair/Easyjet flight though, where your legs slowly merge with the chair in front of you...
...plus, if you're careful, you get to use the wood for things. Obviously you can't burn it, but sequestered carbon remains just as sequestered if you build buildings out of it than if you left it in the forest --- frequently better, because preserved structural wood doesn't rot as quickly as a dead tree in the forest.

Of course, you still need a lot of trees. The internets say that a rough rule of thumb for the amount of carbon in a tree is about a tonne. Therefore, given current carbon emissions of about 10^10 tonnes a year you'd need to plant more trees than that --- every year. (And then wait multiple decades. This isn't a short term solution.)

As you say, another reason to plant them is for local benefit. You don't mention that trees also regulate the local microclimate; they tend to make rain, for example. When Cyprus was deforested, it got a lot drier. I knew someone who was working to try and reforest a lot of it with the explicit goal of trying to fix some of the water supply issues; I don't know if they got anywhere. And, of course, they're just nice to be around.

Recent research show that there are about 10^12 trees in the world.

http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/09/02/43691905...
I prefer the modern music inspired by her original. Such as:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDi9eHTvis0
Apparently the list is limited to Europe.

But many millennial Europeans would love to live in NYC or SV/SF.

A problem for them is that university education is "free" in much of Europe, paid for by high taxes and they can't afford university education in the US. But if it were affordable compared with Europe, we'd see a lot more europeans going to college here and remaining afterwards.

Tel Aviv is great for a young crowd: a very active Mediterranean city with a great tech startup scene.
Of course. Most Martins are damn fine guitars.
>Do you remember the "super fast hash algorithm" from a few weeks ago that turned out to be rubbish? What about the "high performance TCP proxy" on the front page right now that's not proxying correctly or with unusual speed?

Seems like debunking Hacker News stories might make for a fun project.
You've just convinced me that I never want to be a landlord. I don't need to read any more. All of that stuff sounds like stuff out of my worst nightmare.

In fact, I don't even want to own a home any time soon. Sounds like way too much work.
What is your opinion of Thorlo?
The author states that "is impossible to deny that Facebook, Google and Amazon have stymied innovation on a broad scale", and then points to falling profits of music and newspaper industries as the victims of said stymied innovation, the very actors that have fought the innovation of the last 25 years the hardest.
The mind in the machine: Demis Hassabis on artificial intelligence
> Apple is hugely monopolistic

Being a large company doesn't make you a monopoly, nor does anti-consumer mean the same as anti-competitive. In both product segments you mention (smartphones and personal computers), Apple has a minority marketshare. "Monopoly" isn't a catch-all phrase for "mean business"; it has a very specific meaning, and Apple isn't even close.
The World's Oldest Person Dies at 118
This would probably be better if each cube had only 6 neighbors because the way it is the areas are pretty large and it gets quite difficult.
This essay has high signal/noise ratio. There's a lot to grok and each paragraph tells something new. It's a bird's eye view on modern mining practices. I highly recommend you to read it.
Not quite the same. Climate scientists are notoriously bad at predicting consequences of climate change - kind of like how meteorologists are often bad at predicting the weather.

Why is it okay to be skeptical of what meteorologists are predicting, but not okay to be skeptical of what climate scientists are predicting?

It's one thing to be skeptical of sciences that have stood the test of time like civil engineering and quite another to be skeptical of climate science, whose models are being updated annually in response to the discovery of new variables.

Note: I am not saying we should be climate change deniers, only that we should not blindly accept apocalyptic predictions as the gospel truth of what is going to happen to the planet if we fail to mitigate CO2.
The etc/NEWS file in the source code repo is constantly updated as new features come in, and thus it's a nice start.
Your whole point about Apple seems to misunderstand the meaning of monopoly.

Which market or product category do they have monopolistic dominance of?

Vertically-integrated, closed product ecosystems are not the same as a market monopoly.
That sounds pretty cool. Do you have any details/photos/specs?
Nah, it's where all of the cutting edge tech research is, from wind lidars steering turbines, before the wind has reached it, to new materials for 10MW+ turbines and new grid and storage tech to support it.
Isn't failure to perform a search with due diligence an equal liability in US patent cases?
Yes, in New York City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_steam_system
How can you be monopolistic without having a monopoly, however? Apple has far less than 50% market share in all the markets it operates in (except, maybe, for smartwatches...).

The majority of people does not seem to have a problem with being "locked-down" by Apple: they just buy an Android phone and Windows PC instead.

Google is very different - it has the by far largest mobile OS share and in some markets more than 90% search share. If you are a web (or -- thanks to Google Maps -- physical) business, Google can make or break you and there is nothing you can do about it. If Apple doesn't like your app, you can just develop it for Android. If Google doesn't like your webpage, no one will find it.
Spending time alone is the best way to get real rest–even for extroverts
Even in the game Monopoly, the whole point is to show how bad Monopolies are!
WhatsApp co-founder Jan Koum: “Most of startup ideas are absolutely stupid”
In many fields, for the past several decades, scientific progress has been inextricably bound with technical progress. New tools yield new experiments/discoveries.
haproxy is quite well documented
Damage to landscape seems like a trivial price to pay.
I am sorry for your loss.

---

Physical books provide random access. I can open a physical book to any arbitrary page without doing data entry. This is part of the a bigger difference, physical books don't require me to be a systems administrator managing files and licenses and network connections and accounts tied to credit cards.

---

Physical books provide parallel access, I can pile open books on and around my desk. I can leave one particular book by my favorite chair and two others by my bed for months at a time and each will be there to create a different experience for my different moods.

---

To me, ebooks are like Skyping a lover or dining in an Indianoplis Olive Garden. Sometimes the best available option, but not an experience worthy of trans-Atlantic travel...sure maybe travel is purely irrational when Google can show me pictures and video of Tuscany and Wikipedia can give me its demographics.

---

The touch of a clothbound book is not like holding my cellphone and the typeset pages of a trade paperback are distinct from my laptop's screen and the heft of one book is different from the other. Tufte is not a flavor of Soylent.

---

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
There are things that are worth diversifying on. Basic subsystems that only serve to keep the OS running is not one of them -- the benefits of standardization far outweigh the costs of lack-of-diversity. (Of course this is just my opinion, yours may differ.)

As to freedom: I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Can you expound?
That works nice, as long as it lasts. Do you think your manager views your relationship as a partnership? What happens when his boss jumps on him for failing to deliver something, delivering something poorly, etc.? Are you sure he's not going to serve you up as a scapegoat?
I suggest working with just evil mode for a bit, or going all the way with vanilla emacs. Spacemacs is great, but overwhelming. Also, spacemacs should not be used in sensitive contexts, because it is a massive security hole: it brings in a vast number of melpa packages, the git repositories for any one of which could be compromised. And whenever spacemacs updates, it updates all those packages for you, and melpa updates a package on any new commit to the source git repository.
I just use this search[0]. I believe this is the latest filing[1]. Full docket is here[2]. Note that many of the filings arent mirrored publicly, so you would need to buy them through PACER.

[0] https://www.documentcloud.org/public/search/Waymo

[1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3676397-Waymo-Motion...

[2] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4609586/waymo-llc-v-ube...
I kind of marvel at such comments. You don't understand a single sentence so you give up on the whole article? And then you feel the need to announce your ignorance?

The entire article is very much about "bigness" and it is interesting to see how a non-tech person views the state of the web. The reality is companies like Google and Facebook can and do leverage enormously powerful network-effects. This makes it very easy for them to completely and utterly dominate various ecosystems and turn them into mono-cultures. Especially with Facebook what we're seeing isn't any kind of real diversity but simply a cesspool of propaganda [1]. It's not really good for anybody.

But then it's not clear that information monoculture that Google and Facebook produce could be broken up even if one were to break up the companies. Even if Facebook were regulated out of the "news business" competitors would emerge that leveraged Facebook's graph and you'd get the same issues.

The problem is on the demand side. People want fake news, they want to be lied to, and they certainly don't want to hear any kind of in-depth, reasoned, factual analysis. Google and Facebook are just giving people the tools to create such toxic information ecosystems. This wasn't an issue a long time ago when everybody simply consumed their regional information sources but with the rise of cable news it can hardly be said that this is a new issue.

In the long run rather than breaking up these companies they should be pressed to develop technological solutions. Similar to the way email was saved from the never-ending tsunami of spam by Bayesian filters and DNS-based black-lists and white-lists, Google and Facebook should be encouraged to develop measures that can at least identify and warn somebody when they enter a toxic information eco-system.

[1] https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became...
This is a cool concept. The one problem that I had, is that it is difficult to tell which cubes the numbers are paired with. I think that it would be more intuitive if the numbers were printed/etched into each face of the cubes (like dice, but with normal numbers).