skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"I don't know how we do it, but we need to start rebuilding community as a social network of interpersonal support rather than merely a zip code."

The obvious, true, academically-established but politically-unacceptable answer is that we need homogeneity.

People give a crap about others in their tribe, who will have their back later, who are working towards the same social goals as them.

People don't give a crap about people of other tribes, who disrespect/hate them and their beliefs, who are working to move the world in an entirely different direction.

Robert Putnam at Harvard did a study around ethnic diversity and social trust/cohesion, hoping to find that diversity helped cohesion. But, he found the opposite - diversity eats away at public trust, far more perniciously than he thought or believed. He delayed publishing for years because this result appalled him so much. But, he's a good scientist, so he did eventually report his findings [1].

So, if you want that genuine sense of community togetherness, you need to:

1. Develop a distinct identity, with a clear definition for who is and who is not in the tribe. People being as they are, you need to develop a feeling of specialness in the in-group, and a sense of otherness towards outsiders.
2. Encourage group-signifying standards, practices, and rituals on members.
3. Do not admit new members who cannot or will not homogenize into those tribal signifiers.
4. Do not permit foreign allegiances among members.

Basically, do what Japan or Korea do now, or what the West used to do in the 50's, and what all pre-modern societies did.

II

Unfortunately it's hard to admit this, since feel-good wishful thinking about diversity is so pervasive. The idea that "diversity is our strength" is one of the Great Lies of the modern dominant cultural dogma. It's the exact opposite of the truth. Unity (while learning from others) is strength. Diversity is conflict.

And everyone knows this, when it's presented the right way. We all know that it was a great crime when the British and French deliberately drew Middle Eastern country borders to contain several tribes in one country. Iraq is in constant civil war because it was designed to be in constant civil war, by putting together Kurds and Shia and Sunni in one country. The British used diversity as a weapon on the Arabs, and it worked. It's still working. The damage never ends. Meanwhile, Iran is at peace, because it is reasonably homogenous. So is Pakistan, because they persecuted the Hindu population from 15% in 1948 to 0% today.

Diversity is not strength. In the Balkans, in Rwanda, in Chechnya and Syria and Iraq and pre-partition India/Pakisan and modern India and Aceh province and western China and Paris Banlieues and Molenbeek and Malmo and everywhere else, diversity is conflict.

So if you want unity, choose homogeneity.

-----

[1] a starting ref on Putnam's study: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7e668728-5732-11db-9110-0000779e23...

Other reading: Coming Apart by Charles Murray
Yes. Everyone does.
> You're not thinking it clearly.

Your useful comment reads just as well without this. While you may think they're not thinking clearly, stating so is unlikely to convince them of your argument.
>If they launch Verizon Music, then they'll have to build a service as good as Spotify (if not better) in order compete with Spotify.

Not really, they could just charge an additional $10/mo for users to access Spotify and people will start to choose Verizon Music since it is half the price, even though it is worse, which then bleeds Spotify dry.
You think Etrade doesn't sell order flow?
It's a very well entrenched common law concept. The same goes for swimming pools: if you build a swimming pool and don't put an adequate fence around it, and a kid comes by, jumps in and drowns, you're probably going to be found liable (not criminally, but you can be successfully sued for it)
Yes, this is very important. We give up way too much in modern society. "I can't help it", "I'm stuck like this", or "there's nothing I can do" are cop outs 99.99999% of the time.

Change is not always easy, but it is nearly always possible. Don't believe defeatists who want you to believe that you're stuck (a belief they usually push because they benefit from your non-movement).
You realize he is a core kernel dev, right? He's splitting into pieces one at a time. When a part of Linux sucks and your patch changes it, upstream has you change the part that sucks and then adapt your patch to it. Makes things often take longer than necessary for new contributors.

To give you an idea of Kees's contributions:

~/git/linux (master)$ git remote -v
origin	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git (fetch)
origin	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git (push)
~/git/linux (master)$ git pull
Already up-to-date.
~/git/linux (master)$ git log --author="Kees Cook" --pretty=oneline | wc -l
701

Basically, he is getting as much of grsec as is feasibly upstreamable upstream as he's able to. Due to upstream Linux policies, the end results often turns out very different than the original grsec patches they were extracted from. Perhaps that is a better way of putting things?
Maybe the archive team can help ? http://www.archiveteam.org/index.php?title=Main_Page
You picked the first thing you could find in wikipedia and claim that refutes an article you haven't bothered to read? Who's cherry picking again? Introversion/Extroversion has nothing to do with novelty seeking. Read the article I linked.
Saying something you would think is harmless might very well lead them to suspect you. It's not the police's job to decide your guilt or innocence, it's their job to collect evidence and find someone the state can prosecute. Even if you are innocent, it will cost you hundreds of thousand of dollars and being arrested and innocent goes on your record.

The justice system in the US is completely broken. You should be very afraid.
Why the Security of USB Is Fundamentally Broken
It's fine to say no to requests. I don't like how organized the charitable industry is in the US and the high-pressure tactics used to solicit donations. I prefer to donate anonymously or tell charitable solicitors that the more often and elaborately they contact me the less likely I am to contribute to their cause. Frankly I prefer just getting cash directly into the hands of people in need and don't burden myself with worrying about which cause should have priority over others.
I had the fortune to work on COBOL software for brief period of time at my last job, which was at a financial clearing company. This group of 50+ COBOL applications that was the lifeblood of the company and a bad run could cost the company millions. The software was started in the early 90s, so it was easily 20+ years old when I was working on it. There was very little documentation regarding the process and the people who worked on the system were gone. I bring this up because when you have software that old you typically aren't going to have the original people who wrote it at the company nor will you have the people who gathered all of the requirements. All of the knowledge that went into that product was virtually gone.

You are at a known state but you now have to re-create the steps to get to that known state as I'm sure a lot of the domain knowledge around the product is not there anymore. Not only that, you now most likely have other sources consuming the output of the original COBOL application so you have to ensure that the other applications are able to consume the new data and that those don't break either.
> Traffic calming isn't decreasing the safety of a road, it's decreasing the perceived safety of driving at higher speeds.

It is decreasing the actual safety of driving at higher speeds. And at lower speeds for that matter. The hope is that people will overcompensate for the danger, so that the safety improvement from driving at lower speed is more than the safety loss from the inherently dangerous design. That is obviously not a desirable trade-off, even when that actually happens.

> What would that even look like? What would you do to increase the safe speed of road? You'd widen the lanes, limit access etc... All of these things are antithetical to making a road safer for non-motorists.

You separate the motorists from the non-motorists. Put sidewalks and bike lanes on the opposite side of each building from the road, so that a building has motorist access on the north and east and non-motorist access on the south and west. Then the building to the north has motorist access on the south and pedestrian access on the north etc.

Build pedestrian tunnels or bridges at busy intersections so that pedestrians and cyclists are never in the road at all.

Houston has a system of underground pedestrian tunnels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_tunnel_system

None of those pedestrians has ever been hit by a car at any speed.
I don't see my comment as negative. Both are good, but one is going to have an order of magnitude larger effect on scientific progress than the other.

To say that the effect of Gates's work will be to merely bring more people along for the ride instead of getting left behind as the original commenter stated is not understanding the full effect of his work. Gates is accelerating the ride.
That retirement lasted all of what, a month?
The Paperclip maximizer assumes that you could have an AI smart enough to turn the world into paperclips, but not smart enough to understand what the human meant by "make me some paperclips".

My guess is that paperclipping the world takes magnitudes more intelligence than understanding what a human means when saying something ambiguous.
> It reinvents how people interact with artificial intelligence by allowing you to teach it instead of guessing what it'll understand.

Putting out an app like this seems like a great idea, if only to have a platform to start collecting and cleaning data (for your MTurkers, relatives, and bored employees). Speaking of which the privacy policy link goes nowhere...

On a related note, does anyone have details on the penalties for not having a privacy policy on a Google Play app? They seem to be a little more insistent on having one than Apple.
straw man, it was the stated reason they originally implemented the tax, and has been the reason people have defended it since.
but given political considerations, can that particular science be trusted?
I wrote a program and I'm getting sub 6 for every easy game.
Think of the board as a grid of numbers.

0 1 2

3 4 5

6 7 8

Then an L shaped pattern would be the string 0367.

The main idea is that you first build a list of every possible combination of legal moves. Then you take a random guess from that list and you will get back the number of white and black dots.

Now, since you know your random guess and the right answer produces X white dots and Y black dots, you can remove from the list of possible combinations every combination that has:
dots(myGuess, combinations[i]) != (X, Y)

you can keep taking random guesses from this list and filtering after each attempt until you get the right answer, I'm not sure of the math but I think worst case It'll be 6-7 moves to find the right answer.
> How Does It Works?

For a natural language processor, they sure could benefit from better proofreading.
Indeed. He's talking about something that needs FDA certification. AWS (powers the Dot) is great, but even they'll tell you not to depend upon it for life-critical workloads.
Ask HN: Unicorns as a Service?
Would it be possible to invest a dollar for a billionth of a startup, valuing the startup at 1 billon? If so, I'm willing to do it as a service for 5 bucks a pop.
Incapsula vs. Clean Pipes: Seven Reasons to Keep Your Network Safe
*Lots
Oh, I'm not bookmarking such kind of content usually. I guess in any case a system that check the type of content (html/image/sound/video) will be needed to select the storage format, so the annotation may then also be adapted to the content type. In any case a way to manually add tag would exist so it's feasible to add such content.
It appears that Antbleed is a proposed temporary denial of service attack.

Even without Bitmain being malicious, the API is unauthenticated and would allow any MITM, DNS or domain hijack to shutdown Antminers globally. Additionally the domain in question DNS is hosted by Cloudflare making it trivially subjected to government orders and state control.
I have been thinking for a long time that such prosthetic arms should also be able to act as USB HID. e.g. send keystokes "directly" from the nerves - optionally merging with the input from a regular keyboard. And once you have that USB cord from your new arm, you might as well pack some flash storage, 2FA device, etc in there.
AFAIK all of the Xeon chips support ECC, every Xeon E3 chip (which uses the desktop socket) I've looked at includes it.
Change Your Mindset, Change Your Life
They haven't made it hard; the phone-home is unauthenticated, so you could just spoof someone's DNS for instance.

But even if a third-party exploit were impossible, it's a real problem if one company actually has a kill switch for 70% of Bitcoin's hashing power.
If you are using the cloud for email they can usually see all of your activity. Email is also how you typically reset passwords. It can expose corporate secrets.

In practice, nobody encrypts their email. And even if they do, the cloud still gets all the metadata.

Running your own trades the above issues for other issues, but depending on your priorities and fears it might be worth doing.
Ohio seems to be following a similar trend in recent years, John Kasich seems to actually walk it like he talks it where policy is concerned. I would have been fine if a meteor had landed on Trump and Clinton at the last presidential debate and we ended up with Kasich because nobody wanted to start the election season over.
> If they launch Verizon Music, then they'll have to build a service as good as Spotify (if not better) in order compete with Spotify.

This is the problem though. What happens when they build Verizon Music and then charge people to use (or otherwise harm access to) Spotify?
Did anyone ever do that?
"I don't have any children, why do I have to pay property tax to fund my towns schools? I'm being ripped off!"

Because an educated populace is necessary to support their prosperity. Those kids will enter the workforce, provide social stability, demand goods and services, and pay taxes that support other people including retirees.

Actually, I estimate that I do pay a fairly high percentage of my kids' education. My house is among the most highly taxed, and my kids are among the cheapest to educate. In reality, I'm also paying to educate other peoples kids.

But it amuses me to think of a system where I pay 100% of their education, but reap 100% of the economic benefits stemming from that education. One idea is a deal, where you agree to pay 100% of your kids' educational costs, and in return, their future payroll taxes are paid directly to you. It's actually a horrifying idea, but it lets people think about the relative amounts of money that we're talking about: A few thousand dollars per year for 13 years, followed by many more thousands of dollars per year for four decades.
If the FBI wanted to interview you, your best bet would probably be to ask one of the corporate contract lawyers for a white collar criminal defense lawyer. If you couldn't do that for whatever reason your next best bet would be to shake your network to find another lawyer and ask him for a recommendation for a white collar criminal defense lawyer.
I've never been to a conference.

I was interested in an upcoming conference related to some technology I have been working with, so I decided to calculate what it would cost to attend. The fee to attend the conference was not outrageous, but I would have to fly to the location and find lodging for 3 nights.

I decided I could probably do it for about $1,000 if everything went well.

Then I realized that I would probably be able to just watch the videos on youtube afterward. Since I wouldn't know any of the people in attendance and my knowledge of this technology would barely let me converse with experts, it seems like a simple choice.

So if you're hosting a conference, how do you convince people to spend a significant portion of their yearly salary and miss several days of work instead of staying at home?
maybe there was a form of homo erectus already in america, using stone tools etc, having arrived 130k yrs or more ago, and then the indians wiped them out when they arrived much later--that would explain indian tales of having wiped out primitive cannibal tribes (a movie called bone tomahawk was inspired by these tales)...of course the political considerations would tend to suppress this idea.
Eh, I don't know. Have you lived in a ghetto†? (Not a racial ghetto; I mean a class ghetto—the part of a city usually referred to as "the projects.")

In a ghetto, "murder, muggings and drug crime" are [still] facts of life. In a ghetto, police cars are like beacons radiating "no crazies are gonna try to get in your face" as long as you stay within line-of-sight of one. Homeless people cluster near police stations in ghettos—for protection.

In a ghetto, someone's always passed out on a street corner, and the police are always there trying to see if they're just drunk or if they need to get to the hospital. Once or twice a night (more often on Fridays), you'll see a dude being forced into a cop car while a working girl stands there crying and bruised.

If you live in a ghetto, you've probably been mugged yourself. In fact, it's probably happened more than once. (3 times for me!) As well, you've probably been "threatened"—ended up surrounded by some "friendly" strangers, in situations that could very well have resulted in your death, if you did anything to provoke anyone. You've also probably had people follow you for blocks ranting and trying to grab at you. Or follow you, giving you a "guided tour" you didn't ask for, then insisting you pay them for their "tour" to get them to go away. And each time one of these things has happened, you've likely wished that there was a police officer nearby, but there wasn't; they were too busy dealing with all that other shit above.

If you live somewhere "nice", police officers can seem kind of pointless, and might in fact be a bit stir-crazy and awful. But if you live in a place where they're as over-worked as hospital ER staff with all the shit that goes on each day, you're usually somewhat thankful to have them there. Even if you still do feel intimidated and a bit scared every time you pass by one.

---

† To disclaim in advance: I don't mean one of those weird mid-US ghettos, with the police who grew up somewhere else, likely of a different race from the people who live there; the kind where all the awful racial police violence happens. I mean a ghetto patrolled by its own.
So your email is in your home?
Hmm. Wouldn't take much to patch this to leverage spot instances or spot fleets. Becomes a big cost saver at significant scale.
Maybe they are under contract not to pass information to third parties or maybe the company policy is to not let internal email off the network.

That you don't understand it is likely from the perspective of an individual, possibly a private user. For those applications you can't beat the cloud. For business use every business needs to weigh their own needs.

Even then though, many business think they need to have their own server when they really don't and vice-versa.
Check the last word in the GP -- I think that was intentional.
Example:

You're an IT guy who manages your company's MacBooks, including the FileVault institutional decryption key.

A fellow employee is being investigated for a crime, say possession of child pornography. You have no knowledge of what is or isn't happening on the computer.

Your management directs you to cooperate with the Federal Agent, answer questions, and provide technical assistance as required. You refuse without advice of your personal counsel.

End result: You are terminated for insubordination.
Share interesting news from world wide with your team members in slack
> Then again, I'm a grammatical traditionalist: I consider English to have a male gender, but rather the three genders "inanimate", "female", and "animate".

Ironically for a grammatical traditionalist making a comment about grammar, this sentence is not grammatically correct.
You can eliminate the mud by adding a settling tank for the well water. Water flows from the well to the settling tank, where it sets awhile as the mud settles out. Frome there it goes to general distribution. Put a small plug at the bottom of the settling tank for flushing the mud out periodically and a vent or a valve at the top of the tank to drain off gases that are in the well water.

What gases? Glad you asked!

Mostly natural gas that is in the water. This is especially important for people with a water well who live in an area where fracking is done. w/o the settling tank you may find that your faucet, while open, can sustain a significant flame.
Me personally? I'd ask my family law attorney for a referral first (he's the guy who did our wills), and then go straight to the local bar. But you can ask your corporate contract lawyers, friends, colleagues, parents, priest, or mentor for referrals.
Actually, they can provide that (somewhat publicly responsible) UX by extension without tracking at all. It doesn't sound very "googly" to do so, but who knows, maybe they do... ;)
It really depends on the individual. but over time it's pretty easy to sort the grifters from the truly needy.
Not necessarily. It could be smart enough to know what you meant (and indeed to deduce the entire history of your thoughts!) and simply not care, because you told it to care about something else.

For example, maybe you inadvertently programmed it to "be totally literally 100% certain that you've completed the task I told you to do". Then from its perspective, there's always a tiny, tiny chance that its sensors are being fooled or malfunctioning, so it can't be literally 100% certain that it's ever made a paperclip successfully, so by your programming, it should keep making more paperclips. This is independent of whether or not you wanted it to do that: it's a result of what you programmed it to do and what you told it to do.
A voice of reason! I don't know why these discussions become so polarised, so quickly. Most of the time, it seems if two competing theories have supporting evidence, then there's probably some truth to both of them.

Nature or nurture?
Free market or regulation?
Individualism or collectivism?
Career or family?
Fat or carbs?

The truth, or optimal choice, always seems to lie somewhere in the middle... some combination of the two. Yet, more often than not, we immediately devolve into partisan camps fighting for one side.
Please, tell me you simplified the math in Mathematica and that you didn't go through the C file manually?

If it's the latter, how did you keep your sanity?
And to be fair to Pai, he has consistently said his main goal is to reduce the regulatory burdens preventing people from getting in to the market.