skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> You know there was mass advertising before the internet right? A lot of it, on TV, radio, magazines, newspapers, door-to-door salesman,

All of them manageable and skippable through various means. For instance I know/knew many people who would record TV to video, just so they could skip past the ads.

The difference is that this new medium puts the receiver in control, not the transmitter. And that means people will gravitate towards what they consider the best experience, the experience with no ads.

If that doesn't work for whatever publisher or site-owner, they'll have to ask for direct payments, and the market will get to decide which web-sites the internet eventually ends up with.
The World Economic Forum predicts a USD 400 trillion pensions shortfall by 2050
> It is truly tragic that the U.S. has abandoned its leadership and moral authority on one of the critical issues of our time.

Leadership in fighting climate change? Cmon' every EU-country is better at fighting climate change than the US. Denmark has at least 50% of their energy coming from their huge wind farms. Norway has a huge network of chargers for electrical cars, tax cuts for electrical cars and Sweden is huge in all sorts of environmental savings.

In Sweden you can't even order a fucking burger without seeing how much CO2 that produces and ads for vegetarian burgers that are better for the environment.

If you really think US is good at all at fighting climate change, you should really come to the EU and watch us recycle. Even during the recent terror attack in Stockholm there were people recycling.

Proof:

http://www.cbc.ca/radio-content/archive/undertheinfluence/ma...

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2012/1204/360_intl_healthy...

https://www.reddit.com/r/sweden/comments/64199h/two_swedes_r...
The HDFS Juggernaut
Hmm, maybe I've been overcomplicating the problem in my mind. You've given me some good ideas.

Bigrams, as your own example shows, are too simple: in both examples, "car" will get related to "a", instead of "getting" and "driving".

Maybe if I parse all sentences with dependency and built dependency bigrams, and score sentences with frequency/inverse_freq and length of sentence (short sentences are better).
I was refering to the giganting corporations that were created during the dotcom era that investors threw money at but never became profitable.
There's a wonderful old sitcom called "The Goode Life" where one of the characters walks in to the council offices to pay her council tax and proceeds to itemize and declare which services she is unwilling to pay for as they were unsatisfactory...
> Finally, the most basic feature of mass in classical mechanics is that it is conserved. For example, when you bring together two bodies, the total mass is just
the sum of the individual masses. This assumption is so deeply ingrained that it was not even explicitly formulated as a law. (Though I teach it as Newton’s Zeroth Law.)

The author may wish to check [1] for historical reference.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass
You might find this interesting in the vein of weird networking things: https://www.ibiblio.org/harris/500milemail.html
There's more money than there are good deals in Silicon Valley, ...

Is that true? VCs aren't acting the way they would if they really believed it. If they did, they would refuse funds from potential LPs, since they really can't find professionally responsible places to invest it. But that's not what they do. Alternately, they might take the LPs' money, warn them carefully that they could be investing in some real longshots, and then be willing to invest on fairly generous terms in any number of startups that look to be competently run and pursuing plausible opportunities. But that's not what they do, either.

Something doesn't add up.
One of the reasons I think that we hackers like to stay out of politics is we feel that politics itself, as a subject, is broken - and we can fix it by computerising everything.

This may or may not be true. In the meantime, computer programmers all over the world are working on computerising subjects that are traditionally used to having political power/influence involved. Pulling the humans out and replacing them with shell scripts, in this scenario, is of course a source of contention.

Fundamentally, governments and politics are broken. Computers can be used to fix them. However, this is one of the most controversial areas of computerisation and - like politics itself, along with governance - a cause of never-ending social strife.

Its almost like something, "ethical", is missing in the equation.
I think you're underestimating the issue.

The core issue here is spam, and whether or not it's possible to make a non-centralized open source self-contained spam figthing engine is still unanswered.

I'm not going to go into details, but I invite you to read this article for some background:
https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2014/000780....
The recipe for the catastrophe is design + time, so it's not like "new designs have fewer failures" offers much comfort. Of course they would.

Plus, previous installations had fewer potential non-design-related issues, such as terrorism, which (in today's nihilistic "more possible damage, including innocents and even myself" way) wasn't as much a thing in the 60s and 70s.
Or more generally, "welcome to the over-valuation of every asset class". Cryptocurrencies, housing, various kinds of stocks - there's more money than ever in the world, all of it chasing a return.

More complex packaging is part of it (think confusopoly of mobile plans applied to investing) and I think the paper has useful advice for "non preferential" investors, but it's not the whole story.
When I read the article, I didn't know it was written be Stephen Wolfram. It sounded like any other math/tech blogger. He'd played with these things when he was younger, similar to what many programmers have done. And he was excited to find something familiar on a public building. It sounded completely non-arrogant to me. I used to play with fractals and would be just as excited to see my familiar toy on a public building, even though I didn't discover them.

He didn't claim to have invented it, or that the building was designed in his honor. I think you have to be expecting arrogance to see it in this article.
The German army leaders thought straight this way.

This directly led to the 2nd World War.
Patreon is good, though it has two major issues:

1. Unless you're on the more popular end of the bell curve, it's supplementary income, not a replacement for ads or subscriptions. The average Patreon user couldn't survive and pay rent with the amount they're making on the platform.

2. It's very much tailored towards 'personalities' rather than platforms or institutions. If you're a public figure whose work involves being in front of the camera/being highly visible with a dedicated fanbase, then Patreon will work great for you. If you're working on a website or platform and aren't treating it like a personal brand... not so much. An LPer like PewDiePie or Markiplier will make more from Patreon than the likes of the New York Times or Wall Street Journal would.
"Pears for the heirs"
Prisoner's dilemma: If only one ad-supported site switches to pay-per-view or a subscription model, people will go to the other ad-supported sites instead. It would take all of them to switch.

And if that happens, the experience would be strictly worse for the consumer. Every individual is going to have access to less content because they're not going to subscribe to every site that might conceivably have an insightful article at some point.

What does work is patronage-supported content, but only for certain types of content. For example, if Youtube were to remove ads tomorrow, I would expect most channels with original content to survive on crowdsourced patronage (i.e. Patreon or similar), but I would definitely not expect Patreon to be able to support investigative journalism. (It would be great if it were! But I don't see it happening.)
A war with the US or Germany is pointless from Britain perspective. So is it pointless for the US or Germany. Nobody benefits.

Britain was perfectly willing to accept the rise of the US. They were willing to accept the growth of Germany until they started behaving very aggressively.

Germany could not defeat Britain in a naval race. They had already given up even trying before WW1. Why would Britain intentionally start a war, after Germany had already been defeated. That would only give them the chance to conquer France/Belgium.
PlayerAuctions Highlights Old School RuneScape's (OSRS) Two-Day Updates
That is a big win for freelancers vs staff developers. Because most of these (time pressure, bad quality, bad colleagues, poor decision making etc.) strongly correlates with better paid projects, and freelancers like money and work for it. So we are very rarely unhappy :)
We'll see, I suppose. But most people will just take the approach of the person I replied to. If ad-blocking takes off, we're going to come to a new content winter.
Yes, but the light work, run on a single Python thread, will in some cases take a significant part of execution time.

If you have 16 CPUs in your system, seeing your load at 6% for the first 10% an last 10% of running time, and at 100% in-between surely will make people think there must be easy wins in that Python code. More so since many users will have effectively _zero_ knowledge of C.
I understand your sarcasm. I personally use all of Google's services heavily, but I'll explain my friend's point of view which is not completely unreasonable IMO:

Eventually, you can't know if Google or any company is secretly doing something evil 'against' their own Terms of Services and Privacy Policy, so to be fair to Google we assume that it will stick to them at any given point of time. But, you never know when those privacy policies will change overnight, when the government will change the laws overnight forcing companies to give all the information they have, or when the company will be attacked leaking all data. Also, according to Google's privacy policy there are always some "trusted partners" to which they share the data - whose security measures no one knows anything about. So, the logic is a lot can be done if you have the data. But if you just don't collect it (and it's clearly written in the Privacy Policy), governments/hackers/future evil buyers of the company can't do anything.
two things, firstly don't confuse hackernews with hackers as a group.

secondly and the most important is that politics posts here usually devolve into flame wars, and people don't like that.

Finally this submission has already been flagged, I notice.
Well, there certainly is a cost involved in running (and developing) the service. It would be more credible, though, if they disclosed the size of that "small portion".
If you can absolutely correlate the cancer to the presence of fly ash then yes. But that is going to be rather hard. How do you normalize for other equally chromosome-destroying environmental factors? Maybe drinking two cans of Coke a year less gives you exactly the same level of risk than someone living in a fly-ash free building?
Καλοκαίρι Κάνουμε Πιο Πολύ Σεξ; – ESCORTS – ESCORT ATHENS – ESCORTS ATHENS
Catch the Hype for Stormblood, the Next Final Fantasy XIV Expansion
I don't know.

On one hand I applaud Google's decision[1] to put its weight against autoplay videos, prestitial ads, and huge above-the-fold ads that are the main driving factor for me and many others to install an ad blocker in the first place.

I would love to live in a world in which ad blockers are not necessary, everyone displays tasteful ads and every party involved gains something in the end.

On the other hand advertising companies are still hell-bent on tracking and profiling people by whatever means necessary to target them better with ads. They amass huge amounts of information that, if put in the wrong hands, could lead to a disaster.

This is what still makes (and will still make) blanket ad-blocking a necessity, IMO.

---

[1] I'm ignoring the huge conflict of interest for the sake of argument here.
The blockchain and us (Documentary – 2017)
That's dismissing all the genuinely insightful articles that I discover through my subscription [1] to HN.

[1] Read: Addiction. :)
>Third, how is it not adoption when Facebook, Github, Dropbox, Google and many others have added it.

adding != users are using it (they don't)

19 is price for yubikey, maybe some do for 5, it doesn't matter because it should be 0 and no hardware costs that. Making auth layer for general public as hardware is a mistake #1.

>When is the last time authentication technology has been adopted like that? I would think never.

Facebook Connect. Hell of a success. It's centralized, though (and we made decentralized securelogin.pw)

Google says some of their 50k employers are happy with experience. That's it, has nothing to do with users of Google.
I'm intrigued - so you're open to all any approaches from wealthy blackhats? You'll work, no questions asked?
Hackers don't bother with politics because they understand that it's the people who change the world and not the politicians. Politicians' job is to get re-elected, everything else is irrelevant.
List of unsolved problems in computer science – Wikipedia
But Flattr will.

The data is still being generated. It's a matter of whom you trust with this data.
Location:Abuja, Nigeria

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Maybe

Technologies:Javascript, PHP, Java, TypeScript, HTML5, CSS, Laravel, NodeJs, VueJs, JavaEE, Angular 1.x, MongoDB, SQL,

Résumé/CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nut9U4aI96mXneFlzSDL1r33...

Email:verem.dugeri@gmail.com

Github: https://github.com/andela-vdugeri
Care to back this up with links and data?
I never saw an article that was both flagged and still on the homepage...Didn't know that could happen. Badge of honour really.
Searching for art just got better. Where will you start?
Puzzles Collector, 0.18.6 released
They already have my sign in information. When I say no tracking, I mean nothing other than that. Like what I search, which sites I go to, which videos I watch on YouTube, or mining my photographs for more advertising hints, and what not.
The fun thing about that discussion is note in the first reply:

"[When there is a single Official Wolfram Ego Bitching subhthread in every thread discussing Wolfram], then everyone can enjoy complaining about Wolfram's ego there, without it taking over the rest of the discussion. (This would work better if HN offered a way to "collapse" subthreads.)"

And now we actually have collapsable subthreads!

* proceeds to collapse grandparent
Not an expert, but in the UK the benefits system isn't 'universal', you have to meet certain qualification criteria.

So if you quit your job because your boss is an arsehole or to start up your own business, you don't receive those benefits.
LIGO detects gravitational waves for third time
I don't think one must devote themselves to politics. However, this thoughtful essay by regular contributor here should be UNFLAGGED. It is piercing, but measured and in line with the ideals here on this site AND the reasonable discussion.

If dang or another moderator could weigh in; this is not how I believed flags were meant to be used. We defend free speech here unless we have a strong reason.
Politicians are people, they definitely are changing the world and affecting people's lives. If you care about your society, the world in general, then it is relevant.
A lot of people don't know, or at least, don't instinctively feel this. They make all kinds of jokes and don't realize it might not feel good to someone who can't say anything.
> One of the reasons I think that we hackers like to stay out of politics is we feel that politics itself, as a subject, is broken - and we can fix it by computerising everything.

I agree with the first part, but personally disagree with the second part.

Yes, I find politics broken, but I have absolutely no faith in fixing it in any way. So I hack away on problems I feel like I can solve or at least improve on. This keeps me sane.
You do know wealth can be created?
There's nothing much to do. UBI is economically impossible with current population levels.

Usually, in times of global economic transitions such as this one, a world war happens. There are no unemployed in wartime.
Probably. Which is why they pay more (in money terms, but not always in percentage points).
It depends. Some large commercial landlords in UK such as owners of Carnaby St and Marylebone High St avoid chains on purpose. Sure it cuts into their revenue in the short term, but in the long term it helps to preserve the unique character of the area and thus boosts value.
I agree they would not. But with a 102% tax rate, the only way for you to make (more) money would be to relocate somewhere else.
Ona (https://ona.io/) | Nairobi, Kenya | Senior Software Engineer / Project Managers | ONSITE | Full-time

We build a data management platform and tablet health application used globally to improve child and maternal health, governance, agriculture, access to infrastructure, and government accountability. E.g. our software routed patients during the ebola crisis in West Africa, counted votes during a Libyan election, is surveying national infrastructure post-earthquake in Nepal, and scheduling vaccines in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Zambia, and other places soon.

The stack you'll work with depends on the project, active stacks: Clojure/Script + Om, Django + PostGIS, Tomcat + CouchDB, see our FOSS at https://github.com/onaio/ and our 2016 roundup https://blog.ona.io/general/2016/12/30/year-in-tech-at-ona.h....

In the interview we'll ask tech and background questions to get to know each other, then we'll write and extend code together, https://ona.io/jobs/senior_sw_eng_android.html, https://ona.io/jobs/project_manager.html jobs+swe+opensrp@ona.io@ona.io, jobs+project-manager@ona.io
I cant find the thread, but last year someone posted something close to 'all Trump supporters are idiots, I don't know how he got so popular,' and someone replied, 'I have a top uni degree, successful career and I am voting for Trump, so start with reassessing your assumptions about Trump supporters if you want to understand them,' and everyone just downvoted him. Nobody asked him anything.

For the record I'm not a Trump supporter, but I can see that when it comes to politics people think emotionally and ideologically, and very few are asking themselves "have I not made any mistakes?" in the same way we do (everyone does make mistakes) when we care about being proficient.

I studied economics and had a passion for public policy and realized how corrupt that all is. There's no moral excuse for anyone to still suffer in 2017--but it persists. People are irrational, greedy, and selfish. Not all, but enough.
For your first statement, yes, only those 4 sites will ever use this functionality... (/sarcasm)
Some municipalities have enacted a "blight tax" as an incentive to keep property owners from letting their buildings physically decay, maybe something similar regarding vacant property could be enacted to discourage the "waiting game" described in the article?
Oh dear. I couldn't disagree more with the assessment of this story's position on Hacker News.

There is a difference between sticking your head in the sand politically and having a forum where people with differing political opinions can come together and discuss ideas in other areas than politics. You can both be politically active AND participate in a forum that avoids politics. Hacker News policy and avoidance of most political issues is precisely right in this regard. I know I come here to listen to stories dealing with computer technology and expert/practitioner commentary on those stories and business people engaged in the business of technology, particularly start-ups. At those times public policy has direct bearing to these subjects, such as patent law or net neutrality, I do expect to see discussion here.

Some here have been saying this has to do with US/Paris Accords. I agree with those topics being purged from this forum. I mean, really! How many readers of Hacker News do you think are on the fence about this subject: probably not zero, but my money says pretty damn close. I would wager that most here not only have already formed opinions on the subject, but strongly held opinions on the subject. If that's the case what possible value is yet another place to shout how right you are and wrong the other guy is at the top of your lungs given the number of other venues for such virtue signaling? I doubt you move the needle in one direction or the other on such terms.

So, what can you possibly achieve by being political in all venues and discussion forums? I suppose you can further entrench the move to ideological purity in all endeavors, further degrade any ability to find common ground with people that don't otherwise agree with you, further degrade the political discourse, and achieve a flourishing sense of tribalism in a large, complex society.

Is politics important? Sure it is. But so is time and place.
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to revive travel ban
Base65536 encoding
The VCs of course need to maintain return but they are under some pressure to push money out the door and invest, as their fee is a percentage of funds invested.

There are many funds structured in a way where it's better for the fund (not necessarily for the investor) to invest 2x in questionable companies, than just 1x in great companies, lest they lose fees on the remainder.
I love how this article became an example exactly of what's wrong in politics in general. There is a huge group of people in every political unity, that doesn't care about general consensus, understanding problems, considering different points of view. Yet, these people tend to turn on their political flak cannons from time to time and march into the political landscape like elephants into a porcelain shop (thinking about a funny picture with Trump here).

Many IT guys are like this. They hope their desires are simply well known by everybody and the results ought to be handed to them. That there is a self-responsible process going on that desires not just the fulfillment of a single person's desire but group consensus is just outside their spectrum. They don't even see that it exists.

So instead of discussing about responsibility they decide to use the consesus finding methods like flagging a post to just shut down what is oncomfortable to them, no matter what the results for the group are.

I'm really confused about what could be done with these people. They have the highest amount of participation options anybody ever had on the planet. Yet they don't want to participate. They just want to get fed. And you can't just ignore them because they are so many.
FeelsBadMan, I got it though ;)
Another thing is: they can be "optimized", like, god forbid, given larger eyes, or made unnaturally thin.
I would love to have an open and honest (and civil) AMA from people who are writing these bills. Especially "cyber" legislation.

I personally helped create a government commission in Oakland, California that now decides on privacy topics that go to city council. We need more things like that.
I think sites are still free to offer "register and pay us to see no ads" model, like many already do. Implementing that will cost them money too (especially dealing with accepting payments), or they can just use Google's implementation and just give Google their bank account information, Google takes care of the rest.