skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Global warming might be a bad deal for the globe.

Canada and Russia might benefit from it in a perverse way, but I otherwise agree.

> You are pointing this out why? Obviously the lead in to "just pointing that out" was circular logic that means nothing, and I feel there is a deeper message you wanted to convey but then it's just so easy to type dot dot dot... instead.

Most big city executives are not going to like pulling out of the Paris agreement, so you might as well talk about the mayor of Atlanta, Houston, Salt Lake City...they are going to express support for it. So why not mention them all? It doesn't matter if the big city is in a red state or not.
Six projects were selected: https://blog.pinboard.in/2013/01/pinboard_co_prosperity_winn...
> AFAIK technically taxes are voluntary.

You are incorrect as a large number of would-be tax avoiders can attest.

e.g. Mr. Snipes

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Snipes
'Nicer' is quite subjective. There are definitely people who won't appreciate Rust's sophisticated type system, functional idioms, or obsessive control over mutability.

Not me, though, I love them!
I live in the city and actually didn't know that, good to know.
A couple thoughts - what is equally? The US is the historically the largest contributor of greenhouse gases by a wide margin[1]. And last I checked, a vast majority of people support the agreement[2], including half of trump supporters.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/21/countrie...
[2] http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/paris_agre...
Calvin Klein's Desperation
I think what this misses is that the per-capita emissions matter too, not just overall emissions. It's kind of unrealistic to ask a country to lower its emissions when its per-capita emissions are already just a fraction of yours.

To give a more concrete analogy - suppose there are two countries, A and B. People in both countries like eating tuna. A has far fewer people than B, but the average person in A eats 10x more tuna than the average person in B. As tuna supplies dwindle, would it be reasonable for A to ask B to reduce their consumption of tuna?
I think you might want to take a look at that, it supports what he's saying but as is typical of these fact checking sites, couches it in lots of "well yes but" or "broadly correct, but 'needs context'". I mean look at his statement on India:

> Trump: "India will be allowed to double its coal production by 2020. Think of it. India can double their coal production. We're supposed to get rid of ours."

> India does have plans to nearly double its coal production, and the agreement does not prevent that. But the Paris Agreement does not even mention the word coal, nor does it do anything to put a global moratorium on coal.

Oh the Paris Agreement doesn't mention coal so what he's saying isn't correct? The point Trump was making is that the Paris Agreement isn't stopping India (and China) from polluting. It stops _us_, but it doesn't stop _them_.
We're talking about the difference between linear fluctuations and order-of-magnitude changes. For visual aid, please refer to this relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1732/
The past is the past, but what you want might to reflect on is your current judgement and how it is being driven by emotion and not thinking. Say your email/wallet can be recovered. If you don't know the contents, then really there is absolutely no reason why anybody that attempts to find it should not simply keep their mouth shut, mix the coin and trade it. In fact, the safest options for the other party are to: do nothing, anonymously trade the coin (which you would never know)... well down that list is talking to you for a wide variety of reasons. You have absolutely no leverage (unless this is of course a complete ruse for some other experiment), why do you think you do? You might want to think about that. It will help you in your future financial endeavors.
That sounds like a terrible design flaw. Kids could easily start the car then.
That doesn't change the fact that nearly one out of three Californians voted for Trump (of those who voted, anyways). It's a huge spread politically, but 32% of the population isn't something that can just be handwaved away.
I mean, there are tiling window managers that are happy to tab windows; I use i3 and do this all the time. Bonus: tiling window managers are a great use of limited screen real estate even when showing multiple windows.
This lady's art is stunning. I highly recommend not leaving at the dead butterfly article. The portfolio, in particular.
Check out http://www.eugdpr.org/
Yes, I go to a few underground dance parties a year and it would be a lot harder to find those events (let alone discern which ones I'd prefer to attend, who of my friends will be there, etc) without the networks I have on FB.
do you have internship openings for incoming graduate students? starting a phd in the fall
Large societies and contemporary conservative ideology just don't mix. You can't have a big city and a politician who is anti immigrant, anti gay, anti abortion, anti welfare, anti schools, because being positive on all of those issues is key to the success of that society in the first place. It's like being the executive of a coffee company while hating coffee, it just doesn't work out.
1. Poor countries are allowed to increase their carbon emissions because their current emissions are already low per person, and requiring then to lower emissions would basically be telling then they're not allowed to become developed countries. They will not sign on.

2. We're paying poor countries to mitigate these effects, by subsidizing their use of cleaner energy to industrialize. And to compensate them, since the areas most negatively affected by climate change are also poor.

3. The United States is not, in fact, particularly generous about foreign aid.

4. The Paris Agreement is intended to be a start - the reductions are so small in part to win over right-wing Americans, who in turn have the audacity to turn around and blast this agreement for not being effective enough.
> The US is the historically the largest contributor of greenhouse gases by a wide margin

Sure, but guess what: China is right behind us. History means squat. They're a major polluter _right now_. Why are they not held to the same standard we are?
Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 Mile Islant, and in my own state of WA. How many victims of ratiation caused health issues?
By my reading, the trust of the article is that Trump's decision will have minimal impact on in progress actions to counter climate change, hence the words you quoted. The major impact of his decison will be on the USA's international standing and ability to influence the world.
The US was not obligated to pay $100B/yr in the agreement.

Obama pledged $3B by 2020.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/why-trump-seeing...
Your accusatory comment assumes that the reader:

* Lives in an area with a farmer's market in accessible range (i.e. they don't live in a food desert[1] like ~24 million Americans - and that's just any kinda real market)

* Spends as much or less at the market as on a service like this, factoring in all externalities such as food waste, travel time and expense, and so on

* Has the time to spend getting to the market and shopping

* Has the cash on hand (many farmers markets are cash only - anyone on SNAP, ~43M people[2], is now excluded since those benefits are usually on cards)

* Has a situation that allows "planning out their week"

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert

[2]: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/...
Because it has practically nothing to do with our political divide (you can find left and right anywhere in the world) and everything to do with geography and how it shapes the things we care about.

For example, find me an Alabamian who cares about how the Oroville Dam situation is resolved. Or whether California regulates housing growth at the state level instead of the city level. About how to fund or build CHSRA. Or how to preserve Sierra Nevada forests from climate change and pestilence. Or even how to build sidewalks in suburban Merced.

These things materially and significantly affect Californians, but Alabamians and Australians honestly couldn't give a fuck. But for Californians they get drowned out, both financially and in mindshare, by things that are of far less consequence. We send the majority of our taxes into to the federal ether, never to be heard from or seen again, and it should be the other way around.

Show me a government that is successful, prosperous, and popular with its people, and I'll show you one that is limited in geographic scope.
Firefox.

But I very seriously doubt that's going to happen.
Would anyone be under any illusion that an armed US retaliation against the Pacific Northwest joining Canada would be anything other than just an invasion.
Again, 90% of users out there will never change the browser, not even if the default is IE6 (as the browserchoice case showed).

As long as Chrome is preinstalled, it will win.
Now that the US government has failed to act on climate change, it might be a good idea for US companies and individuals to take up the challenge.
I think my point has been lost and it's tough to transmit tone-of-voice in a comment on a website. My failings. The comment wasn't about shaming him, it was parodying the lazy "I'm just saying" rhetorical technique of casting aspersions on something.

Onward through the fog.
Do you have any plan on supporting C?
We're calling China and India poor countries now? In relation to the US every country is poor. But as you stated, it's a global problem. It needs a global solution. Pollute less! Hold everyone to the same standard.
It does. Complicated in its own way, but better :)
Is there anything in particular about climate science that you need help understanding?
> I think Texas' situation is too unique. They're effectively a petrostate right now.

Conveniently ignoring the fact that California is ALSO a petrostate.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/03/the...
Ack, you're absolutely right. Don't know where I was going with the hypothetical example but my math was totally wrong.
Big difference between business operators and private individuals consuming goods.

Besides there being many more of the latter they also have special legal aspects in the form of all kinds of consumer protections.
I'm sure there are problems with the bill. However, I'm not really interested in after-the-event arguments from a party who've been so anti-science and such deniers for so long.

It's a bit like the Muslim ban that "wasn't" a Muslim ban. If you've been calling it a Muslim ban for a year, retroactively coming back and saying "nah, nah, it's a not a Muslim ban" isn't convincing to the courts. In much the same way, the President cherry-picking bits he doesn't like about the bill sounds hollow.
What’s the Future of Wearable Tech?
What makes you so sure that the "current political climate" is not making people want to move there? I certainly want to now that Trump got elected, and I'm a libertarian.
I strongly agree.

We see a lot of definitions of functional bandied about, often conflating functional with Haskell or with Scala. Those definitions seem to ignore the history of functional programming, including Lisp, as qsymmachus noted. So that's silly. And conversely, one sees a lot of definitions of OO that appear to mean "Java" or "C++". Again, nonsensical when one considers Self, or to a lesser degree Smalltalk.

I do like your conception wherein a language is function to the degree to which it prefers functions as its favourite tool for solving problems, and/or OO to the degree to which it prefers objects as its favourite tool.

Regarding encapsulation as your particular example, OO is clearly fairly obsessed with encapsulation, being almost the definition of an object: a bundle of encapsulated state with the externally-facing behaviour that that object affords. I think that many functional communities/practitioners see this as a much less urgent issue, often going so far as to make no active effort toward encapsulation at all (i.e. not everyone bothers with the lexical-scopes-and-closures solution). Thus we get ideas like "smart functions, dumb data", an idea which makes no sense in OO land.
Woohoo! Congrats, Maciej!
Yes, the main reason for lacking in steel technology probably was the abundance of Titanium.
> ARM has no bios or standard boot procedure.

Doesn't this system use uefi?
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com) | Systems Engineers or Developers | Greater Seattle and Raleigh areas | ONSITE

Founded in 1991, Epic Games is the creator of the Unreal, Gears of War and Infinity Blade series of games. Today Epic is building Paragon, Fortnite, Robo Recall, Battle Breakers, SPYJiNX and the new Unreal Tournament. Epic’s Unreal Engine technology brings high-fidelity, interactive experiences to PC, console, mobile, VR and the Web. Unreal Engine is freely available at unrealengine.com.

We're looking for a variety of folks to help us build, operate and innovate for our online platform that powers our games. Unreal Engine and Unreal Tournament are both open source on GitHub.

Main careers site: https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/SearchJobs

Team Online Positions:

Cloud Engineering Devs (Bellevue, WA + Cary, NC) https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/JobDetail/Bellevue-Was...

Live Operations Producer (Bellevue, WA) https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/JobDetail/Bellevue-Was...

Senior Backend Engineers (Bellevue, WA) https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/JobDetail/Bellevue-Was...

Senior Web Engineers (Bellevue, WA + Cary, NC) https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/JobDetail/Bellevue-Was...

Systems Engineers (Bellevue, WA + Cary, NC) https://epicgames.avature.net/careers/JobDetail/Bellevue-Was...
Google Patent – Automated generation of dynamic data entry UI for database
> That Business Insider link directly contradicts the Tax Foundation numbers. Business Insider puts North Dakota and Virginia near the top, but the Tax Foundation puts them at the bottom.

That is because the Tax Foundation is (rightly) looking at Federal aid that hits state budgets while Business Insider us making the mistake so many others do of totalling Federal spending. It is not accurate to claim a state where the government chose to site a national lab or a bunch of military bases (or where the actual organs of government I are spilling into, like Virginia and Maryland) is receiving "welfare" from the Federal government.
I think it's more reasonable to apply your thinking to counties rather than states. I'm in a deep red state, but the county I'm in is slowly turning blue as tech companies move in and startups grow.

Also, red counties are where most of the food comes from. The farmers who have made it this far (through extreme competition in the food market) are quite innovative, clever, and ambitious. I wouldn't count them out. They don't want big business in their towns, but they also depend on basic services like filtered water, police, a fire department, and hospitals, and they'll make sure those continue to survive.
I've worked with several startup clients over the past year. It is a mixed bag like anywhere in life there are some jerks, some unethical, some selfish, and some overly self important arrogant types.Treating workers, clients, your customers, or anyone badly is not good for business and gets a company nowhere over the long term. Of course, there are companies that can have success in spite of having abusive, unethical leadership, but over the longterm no one wants to work with crappy people for long.

I worked for an abusive, arrogant, child for over two years. I learned much from witnessing his bad behavior and the negative effect it has on anyone that works with him or around him. Despite what a pain it was to deal with this nutcase, in the end I came to pity and feel sorry for him. He is a sad, miserable, petty, mentally ill, child that lashes out at everyone, and essentially spends more time trying to figure out ways to screw his clients and workers out of money than offer anything of value himself. Screwing people and being a jerk is no way to go thru life. These types need mental help.

Turns out this type of behavior hasn't exactly made him a successful business leader. It has simply enabled him to piggyback on others hard-work, shiest his workers, startup clients (and in turn their investors). So in a way he has had a measure of success at screwing people out of money. But over the longterm no one respects him and no one wants to work with him (clients included). By any measure this type is not successful in business or in life, yet crappy greedy mid 40 types behave this way because they no other way and they would rather try to screw a few sheckles out of their clients & colleagues than figure out ways to offer something of value.

Don't let these fools get you down they are a dime a dozen, narcissistic talentless bozo's apparently grow on trees out here in LA. It is a learning lesson to deal with one of these types, as you learn what not to do, how not to act, and how to avoid being sucked into the crappy vortex that is working with these types.
Eventually, maybe. But the Earth's temperature doesn't fluctuate that much naturally:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Vari...

By the time global warming is unstoppable hopefully we'll have the technology to mitigate its effects on humans.
Please post what he said is incorrect. I read the article and found he is mostly correct depending on models etc. Perhaps I missed something but there were no blatent lies etc from my reading.
Power players leaving also undercuts the administration's credibility and lets them devote their energy to opposing it form the outside. Musk gave it a good-faith effort, and I think he's wise to quit, since staying in could do significant damage to his own corporate goals.
as a result of the curvature of spacetime

So... why does this curvature, or slope have any affect on systems of bodies at all?

An abstract gradation of some property alone doesn't necessarily provoke further side effects, so why would gravity (this curvature of spacetime) set objects in motion?

If you have an undisturbed system of cold stones suspended in a void, that are otherwise motionless over time, and then place a strong, cold, static gravity well in proximity, what impels the stones into the curvature? Why does an otherwise motionless stone move into the curvature of said given gravity well at all?
A few counter-points:

- US, per capita, has the highest CO2 emissions of any developed country [0]

- It's a little unfair (depending on your idea of fairness) for developed countries to have benefitted from industrialization and polluting the environment only to close the gate behind them and blame other countries for trying to do the same and catch up in development.

- It's expensive to force nations barely entering industrialization to forego the easy route of using coal/oil/whatever pollutant and jump straight to what can, sometimes, be a more expensive energy source.

- Climate change is a global problem that doesn't mesh well with purely isolationist ideologies. This, primarily, is the biggest gripe with the current administration. It doesn't want to lift a single finger without seeing itself as the primary benefactor. This last part is purely opinion.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
"According to psychologist Ron Friedman, the first three hours of your day are your most precious for maximized productivity."

This is tough for me, because I find that I am most productive during my last 3 hours of the typical 8-5 workday. I am a bit of a zombie in the morning and don't find myself really slipping into my groove until around 10-11am. Unfortunately government jobs do not offer a flexible schedule, so I have never been able to work when I feel I am most productive.
If this is easy for you, you should quit engineering and run a growth equity fund.
The parent comment was flagged dead probably because he forgot to add a /sarcasm tag.
Be great when Weex (vue.js to native mobile) gains enough momentum to be as well documented and supported as react-native

If interested join in here

https://gitter.im/weex-en/Lobby
No, the fact that the earth goes in and out of ice ages. That is not something that occurs on the order of billions of years.
> because there's not one single place controlling your entire feed

That's true with cable too.

> Straight up outlaw such clips that are an attack on a candidate.

What constitutes an attack? Is a clip pointing out that a candidate is wrong on some matter of fact an attack on that candidate? What about a matter of almost-fact (i.e. one where disagreements exist but the preponderance of the evidence is considered to be on a certain side)? This is a serious question; people disagree vehemently on this very matter. As a concrete example, can one point out that a candidate's policies will likely lead to increased atmospheric CO_2 levels? Can one point out that a candidate has not been trustworthy in the past?

I think pointing out potential problems with candidates is _critical_ to democracy functioning. The _tone_ is a separate matter, of course, and I agree that the tone it's often done in is not good for democracy.

I would really like to understand what you consider an "attack" vs "not an attack" and how those definitions match up with how you'd have to define them sanely for an equal-time regime.

> Let me give you examples of where I live, France, to alleviate some of your fears.

France is pretty bad on freedom-of-speech issues, I know; not just in this area. That doesn't mean the US should follow France's lead down that lane.

> We have a council that ensures what is aired is either nonpartisan

Really? And they do this while ignoring their own political biases, including unconscious ones? I am dubious, but it's possible if there is enough of a tradition of doing so that people would be embarrassed to show even implicit partisanship in this situation.

> Attacks are forbidden

"Attacks" defined how?

> Campaign clips are of fixed length

Defined how? Are Michael Moore movies considered "campaign clips"? Should they be in the US?

Again, I agree that the way US elections work is far from optimal. I've just had a hard time finding things to change that would not cause more harm than good, including starting down some seriously slippery slopes to things we have consciously moved away from in the past (e.g. government control over the content of what can be aired on TV).
Amen. Every "fact-checking" site seems to go out of its way to editorialize the facts with what I should think about them, instead of limiting their purview to, you know, the facts in question.

What was Trump supposed to say? "The Paris Agreement doesn't have the word 'coal'"?

---

Don't forget: Being technically correct is the best kind of correct.
I guess you can say lots of things are technically voluntary. I suppose you can say if you choose not to volunteer there may be consequences.
Far too little, many years too late.

At this point, I can't imagine any development that would make me substantially revise my approach to online advertising and tracking, which is - block everything, preferably at the router level. I don't know many tech literate users who think differently.

And for any relatives and friends who ask me to install their computers, I set up adblockers by default. Those who notice (most people, actually) are usually between happy and ecstatic.
It's almost like Facebook is a new AoL in web's clothing, trying to trick less sophisticated users that it's "the internet" when it's really just a single corporations's closed system.
You are just echoing the politician's syllogism: we must do something, this is something, we must do this.

Your point that we could not get anything better is not an excuse for doing something bad.
If these are the best replies to Trump's remarks, I very sadly must agree with Trump. Extremely disappointing.
> Civility is of the utmost importance

Bullshit.