skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The only reason I have cable is BECAUSE of ESPN. Live sports is basically the primary value proposition of cable. Every other type of content out there is suitable for internet services, but having 20,000,000 TCP connections simultaneously streaming the Clemson vs Alabama title game vs 20,000,000 people tuning into a single broadcast is just a recipe for problems.

ESPN is partially a victim of it's own success as well. They do such a great job with online content that where you used to have to tune into Sportscenter, glued to the TV waiting to catch YOUR teams highlights now you can just hop online and catch all of them...immediately.

I remember in college having a roommate who was such a big UNC fan that he bought a VCR just so that he could tape record Sportscenter and rewatch Vince Young highlights.
The concept of dependency is one aspect of ABM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model
I don't get why you're being downvoted, I find the Windows 10 experience to be excellent on desktop and on the Surface.

I get that some people might disagree with this, but could they at least care to explain why instead of downvoting?
True, and to those add the cost of externalities like mining on natural ecosystems and pollution on climate warming and our health.
There’s no good way to kill a bad idea
Agile Development: Ensure a Successful Requirements Gathering Phase
As a Haskell fan I was drawn toward VHDL because of its "strong typing". Haha, it's nothing like what I expected, mainly just a bunch of annoying forced casts from signed to unsigned etc. I ended up liking Verilog better: more characters are dedicated to your intent than to your casts. But ultimately they're not that different.

(Note there are also Haskell-oriented HDL's, but my experience with those wasn't great, at least 4-5 years ago. Proprietary, poor interop, and let's face it, it's not Haskell. On the surface FP seems like a good fit for FPGA, but in the trenches you constantly need lower-level tricks to keep your program's gate count from exploding.)
The booster footage was amazing. Incredible to see just how much it flies through its own exhaust on the re-entry burn!
You're quite right that it's a good idea to write a CV in LaTeX, for the reasons you describe. I just don't agree that it's a good first step into LaTeX. It immediately forces you to google ugly formatting hacks instead of learning to appreciate how nice LaTeX will make an ordinary document look without you expending any real effort on formatting.
GPL at fault. Use public domain to avoid this drama. There is no thought which you can call your own.
Italy has had the coffee bar figured out for about a century:

* Espresso costs about 1 euro, 2 for cappuccino, 2.5-ish for almost any croissant/pastry.

* Customers come in order/pay, stand at a bar to have their drink, all done in about 10 minutes max.

* Staff consists of a middle-aged barista with a bow-tie who pulls flawless espresso shots like a locomotive and a surly lady who handles the money + orders.

* In the evening, add a waitress and serve a limited menu of aperitivo and some specialties.

The expectations are, of course, different in the US. I think there are ways to make it work (1), but yeah, if you want to have that special chilled-out shabby-chic space typified by independent early-90's coffee houses, be prepared to make meager precarious wages at best. Virtually all of NYC is off-limits for such enterprises now because of rent.

(1) For example, this new place in Philly, informal lunch/cafe during the day, trendy byob at night: http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/craig_laban/20170430...
I didn't know that! That does seem like a sweet feature. I'll try it out next time I need to use these services.
"Most "sports" fans are generally ... "

boomers. And they're economically dying out as they retire and the medical industrial complex wrings out the last of their money. Plenty of things cost a multiple of ESPN's cost and are doing fine because they sell well to young people, think of the stereotypical $100+ cell phone service. The vast majority of ESPNs viewers remember when they heard JFK was shot, their viewers are not the Challenger explosion or 9/11 generations.

Baseball has died among youth and the average fan age is now going up more than a year per calendar year. NBA average fan is much younger, like middle aged gen-x. The majority of PGA viewers are nursing home age, golf is so dead, so cringy 90s/00s. The youngest sports are major league soccer and hockey about a third millennial or younger for both, the only pro sports of 2050 are going to be spanish speaking soccer and the few remaining northern state whites watching hockey, the other sports are dead when the boomers are gone.

There is also a compression effect not seen in the past such that the NFL superbowel now gets over 10x the viewers of the world series. The average baseball game has fewer viewers than my county has residents. The average NBA game is only slightly better. In the old days there was a "wide world of sports" concept which is already dead. There isn't a "sports" industry anymore, there's american pro football, soccer for the spanish speakers, hockey and nascar for the legacy being eliminated whites, basketball for the blacks, and the also-ran sports that statistically no one watches.
That's so incredibly frustrating. Device management is something every school needs; how could they fuck that up so completely?
> The future of sports and money in sports is in the live aspect and in the commentary. I want to watch a football game commented by Conan O'Brian or Snoop Dogg or even some entertaining twitch or youtuber not Al Michaels and Phil Simms. Why not collect royalties on commentary streams? Let 1000s of people pay for the rights to comment on an NFL game and let the viewers decide who they want to listen to commentary from. Its absurd that in 2017 people still resort to reddit.com/NFLstreams or NHLstreams to watch some low res game with pop up ads everywhere with commentary from two old white guys.

Over a decade ago, I was channel surfing and stumbled upon an English Premier League (edit: may have been a lower tier matchup) match cast by 2 shit-talking fans, one from each team. I thought it was absolutely genius and while having no interest in either team or even the sport, I was thoroughly entertained.
It's rubbish!

When I load Google.com, I should see the Google logo and at the bottom of a page a "click to continue reading" button that I should, well, click. Then as I continue to scroll down the search entry field should scroll up the page as the Google logo slowly fades out behind it. Searching should feel like an event.

But seriously, I love that Google keeps their search website so minimal. I think that takes courage.
Um, could you give some specific/concrete examples of what you mean, when speaking of this leverage? I honestly have no slightest idea of what you may have in your mind here, and am totally curious - at least as long as we're talking, I assume, about legit/ethical/morally acceptable actions? (Also please note I'm not in US, though I presume it's not relevant to this discussion.)
Trickle down referred to giving tax breaks to rich people so that they would buy expensive things (like Ferraris) and that this spending would spur economic movement because people have to sell, make, and repair Ferraris. The money they receive they would then use to buy groceries or a new TV. This is far different than the notion of the invisible hand, if only we counted government influence (deciding winners and losers).

> If you encourage capitalistic self-interest enough, it will create benefit?

Yes. Look around. I don't discount the role government has played when it does do good things, but the wonders of the world today are largely driven by the desire to do some work in order to gain some measurable economic benefit. Period.

You can't just create "this benefit directly". How would you do that?

I also think your general perspective on business is being warped by your obvious bias. Competition in industry does not necessarily lead toward mean-spirited relationships, or destructive competition. It can, but look at the tech industry, if anything, the opposite has happened.

Also, the wastage of resources is almost laughable. I say this not to be condescending, but because if there is one entity on the planet that is inefficient, it's government. Businesses go out of business if they don't use resources in the most efficient possible way. A government just prints more money, or if worse comes to worse, passes laws or regulations that distort the economy.

There are countries that do better when it comes to private-public cooperation, namely Scandinavian countries, but even those companies are capitalist countries and recognize that government does not have the capacity to guide economic development as a whole compared to the free exchange of goods and services. It's helpful once in awhile to jumpstart an industry, like solar/wind power in the United States, but government should largely stay out of business (aside from obvious regulation and protection).
Ah I remember the days of AIM/ICQ/LiveJournal. I actually was connected more to my friends and even made a lot of serendiptious friendships with people halfway around the world.

Now with facebook, I lost touch with people who refuse to be on FB(privacy concerns).

And forget about making friends with strangers on Facebook (gasp!)
If you're interested in the subject matter, I highly recommend Richard Feynman's 'Six Easy Pieces' series (available on Youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBxHpsmcxyNghmwd6MJBy... ).

Feynman was a key member of the Manhattan project (Wikipedia link here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project ). I trust him to know what he's talking about. :-)
Arichtects demolish Ray Bradbury's home to build their own
This is true. Some on HN call it out as "trite" or not exactly 100% technically correct, but the phrase re-focuses attention on a dangerous situation.

trite (1 week ago; gray): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14181650

original/oldest source? (2010) https://twitter.com/andlewis/status/24380177712

updated for machine learning: https://twitter.com/chrisalbon/status/857609299731791872

> “You are the training data.”
As a fellow Granite-stater, I whole-heartedly agree. If you have a coffee/brunch restaurant with a few special "local" menu items (even if low quality) you can have a packed house every weekend day.
A tool to dump the login password from the current linux desktop user
[0] - For instance, a lot of those social benefits are in fact signs of market inefficiency, and those eventually get "corrected" as more and more people compete in a given sector and the margins dwindle.

Except for when you can get the government to step in and grant you rental rights preferable exclusive rights. Land, property, spectrum, licenses, copyright, patents, trademarks.
Read Chomsky and weep.
I think the analysis is far too flimsy for the conclusion to be drawn. Imagine if you submitted this as a paper.. I suspect the methodology would be torn to shreds.
Yep its cognitive dissonance. We can easily believe anything if it makes us feel better about ourselves.
I'm an editor at a journal, and these fake review cases have one thing in common, which is that the journal is using author suggestions for reviewers to solicit reviews.

For those unfamiliar with the practice, this is common, and seems to becoming more standard at many journals, even (especially?) very reputable ones.

I almost always ignore the reviewer's requests for particular authors, because it always seems to involve a conflict of interest. I am sensitive to requests for a particular author not to review a paper, because of vindictiveness in academics, but requesting reviewers is a different story.

I've seen significant changes in this practice over time. Originally it seemed unusual, almost an option of last resort to cue the editor to bitter feuds or to help identify reviewers in areas that involve highly idiosyncratic issues. At a lot of journals this is still the case. Over time, though, it's seemed to turn into something different, a stopgap measure for overburdened, unconscientious, or harried editors to find increasingly scarce reviewers.

A lot of attention has been paid to the pressures on researchers to publish or perish, quality be damned, and how that affects science. The flip side of that coin, though, is changes in editorial practices at many journals, which have become very cursory, rubber-stamping affairs. Turnaround time on papers is very quick at many journals, which gives authors quick feedback, but at the same time (not necessarily as a result) the review process has become shoddy. Editors are often unfamiliar with the subject material and don't take time to learn it, will grasp at reviewers who might be unqualified or have conflicts of interest, and treat reviews very superficially, even though studies have shown that they are horribly unreliable. To be fair, even finding reviewers can be difficult: I've had conversations with colleagues who have been told not to review because it doesn't bring in revenue to the department. Everyone wants to publish, but not everyone wants to review.

Things are broken in science at the moment, at least in academics. Publishing through peer review has become extremely overvalued. I think it will maintain its place for certain reasons, but some change in mindset or culture around it is necessary.
HBS now has courses like Building Sustainable Cities and Reimagining Capitalism, both courses created in response to what I presume is student interest in subjects beyond the profit maximization motive.

Outside of a few courses and a few class discussions within each course that are centered in exploring social value, the overwhelming majority of the experience requires students to check their social mindsets at the door and think like stewards of shareholder value.

One of the saddest parts about the HBS classroom is its reliance on student participation and student-led learning. While this is an effective way of training students to assert their opinions, I have seen several circumstances in which groupthink and conformist pressure keeps the "social" viewpoint at the margins of the in-class discussion. HBS just isn't the place for critically thinking about anything other than profit and loss.

Edit: grammar
I was answering a specific question about the term, "invisible hand." You've raised valid points, but I wasn't trying to profess an ethical stance for relying on it one way or the other.
35 programming habits that lead to poor code
It is, though. The classical capitalist system is one in which people engage in commerce voluntarily. If both parties do not benefit from a trade then the trade does not happen.
> If you encourage capitalistic self-interest enough, it will create benefit? Why not just create the benefit directly instead of going the roundabout way of having people act in their own self-interest, fostering mean-spirited relationships between people, competition instead of cooperation and general wastage of resources?

The idea is that this "roundabout" way is in fact more natural to individuals. People want to actively take care of themselves and their families first - you may say that "capitalistic self-interest" is actually rooted in our biology. Some forms of market economy seem to be the default, "lowest-energy-state" form of human self-organization. It has an added benefit of being heavily self-regulating through feedback loops implicit everywhere in trade.

Now, it would be wrong to pretend it all worked out perfectly and everyone is happy. It didn't and people aren't happy. Yet capitalism has the neat quality of aligning with a lot of basic human needs[0], and that's why while seemingly "roundabout", it's still[1] much easier than top-down management of social goodness.

--

[0] - Perceived autonomy would be another one of such needs.

[1] - I do wonder if in an interconnected reality of "information age" we couldn't pull off central management driven by algorithms. Someone on HN pointed out to me though that this would still lose an important feedback channel, namely preferences of customers as expressed by purchasing decisions.
And AMD also.
1) Weird how? Any examples?

2) Have you ever used factoring services before? What was the experience like?
So, how do the chains like Starbucks or Costa manage to sustain their business?
As a previous commenter alluded too you need a proper backpack or at least a properly configured backpack. GoRuck is the defacto on this but any bag made of serious nylon with olympic plates and internal PALS MOLLE can work as you can just strap the weight close to your back.

The weight needs to be high up on your back and as close to your body as possible (there is some debate on this but in general that is what most people believe).

Also I don't have a citing on this but I'm fairly certain most people have back problems not from carrying heavy weight on their back but rather sitting down too much and picking up the weight incorrectly.
The line should always be moving. Either up or down, hopefully mostly up, but moving nonetheless. It is perfectly fine for the line to go down, failing is learning. But if the line continues to go down, you're not learning, you're just failing. Fix that. Same as when the line continues to go up. If it goes up with no dips down, you're not learning either. Fix that.

The line should never be level. This is the worst position to be in. It means you're not doing anything at all.
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-...
> FDA rules prevent those events from happening

If that was true then we wouldn't hear about it in the media. We do hear about it, which means that it does still happen, which means that the FDA rules do not prevent those events from happening.
I totally agree with you...but I do think you are missing the large swatch of NFL fans that are "pure" football fans driven almost entirely by the popularity of Fantasy Football. I saw some crazy stat where close to 70% of regular NFL viewers played FFB.

It forces you to care about the performance of players across multiple teams as well as whoever your opponents players are that week.

The football fans I know tend to fall into two demographics: College and Pro. Basically determines which day of your weekend will be committed to watching football all day; Saturday...or Sunday?

Personally, I've been a die hard Clemson fan since before I was born so it's definitely Saturday for me. I haven't watched but maybe 2 NFL games a year for the last 10 years or so but I still play fantasy football.
>Why not just create the benefit directly instead of going the roundabout way of having people act in their own self-interest, fostering mean-spirited relationships between people, competition instead of cooperation and general wastage of resources?

Because people always act within their own self interest for the most part. One may take more than their fair share of the benefits of society while others will attempt to get out of paying theirs. Don't forget the officials whom will attempt to push those monies one direction or another in order to enrich themselves.

Capitalism is the only system that takes this into account as far as I can tell, everything else is either predicated on people willingly giving to help society on the large scale (counter to human nature) or forcing others to do so at the end of a gun (that tends to lead to dictatorships and suppression of freedom as it requires near total government)
I'm that mythical fan who watches full games for teams I don't root for—especially in basketball—but I don't watch ESPN unless they show a good game that I want to see.

They show endless hours of Sports Center—how much can you meaningfully talk about sports? Even most of the commentary in the games is stupid.

Granted, I listen to sports podcasts (and I really like ESPNs NBA Lockdown) but they have one hour, once or twice a week, and they stick to a fairly focused script. In an hour podcast they may have 3 minutes of 'commercials' and 5 minutes of filler. On a lot of ESPNs shows they just don't have enough to talk and end up filling the time talking busting each other's balls because I guess that's what a lot of sports guys do when they hang out
I agree, but I identify specifically as "Generation Y", because that's what we were called before all this smartphone and social media stuff was a thing.
Hypothetically speaking, if you didn't have to spend money on the accountant, and if your invoice was paid immediately 100% of the time, would that get you closer to be willing to give up up to 10%?
Depends on the target demographic.

If the product needs to be something a bit more serious, e.g. fintech product, then take an existing term in the industry or something that clearly relates to it, and put some small spin on it, and a .co and you're ready to go.

If the people I'm targeting are younger, trendier etc, then take any loosely related word, check Google Translate to see if there are any cool sounding translations of it, find something that is short and catch, add a .io and you're good to go. :-)
> that's your entire message history irrevocably exposed to the world.

That's not true.

For example, Bitmessage has chans which are essentially mailing lists. In this case the key is supposed to be known/distributed. Recipients use it to read and publish to the mailing list while hiding their list subscriptions and access patterns. That would continue to work even if a flaw in the crypto is found (at least as long as the proof-of-work hashing algo can continue to perform its function without flaw).
Since we're in the realm of idle speculation here, allow me to posit that the U.S. intelligence services are doing this to each other in some sort of shadowy high-stakes power game. Russia, the perpetual Enemy, is happy to sit in the wings and take credit.
Absolutely would - if you're talking about original content.

However if what you're suggesting is 'lets be the 50,000th site to cover the guy who built his own iPhone' - then little point, already follow too many sites that regurgitate the same content.
Just recompile your app in xcode and it is compatible.

This is a scam. They are building an email list for their outsourcing service.
As someone dealing with an extruding disc right now I hope they heal.

In all seriousness, my research and speaking with specialists is that bulging or extruding disc do have blood flow and they will eventually reabsorb. Even sequestered discs with no blood flow will reabsorb. The tricky part is dealing with the symptoms while not worsening the issue.

Even after an epidural steroid injection, I've been told it could be months before my very large extrusion is gone. So it is a very slow process. The good news is that some research shows that your body can actually be better at absorbing the larger extrusions.
Last I checked, uMatrix by default enables everything for 1st party sites. So if you are at twitter.com, all stuff originating from twitter.com will be allowed.

You should be able to remove this rule in uMatrix's settings in the "my rules" tab. Just click on the rules you want to remove on the table on the right and click on commit to save your changes.
Find efficient way to borrow funds in unemployment
Coin – Used
whenever i see antipatterns i try to avoid them so that i dont pick up anything. i rather read 35 programming habits that lead to good code.
"In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could."
- Rudi Dornbusch, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudi_Dornbusch

Change is closer than we think.
You don't have to be actually fostering strong social ties to believe you are.
I'll read Chomsky's work as a linguist. As for his economic and political writings, I'm going to pretend that they don't exist until he pulls his head out of his ass and stops excusing genocide.