skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not entirely true, from what I understand. The statistic has been replicated in polls and surveys across various college campuses. The OP's representation, and yours, is a little clunky but makes rational sense to me.

His quote is "1 in 5 US women are estimated to be raped before the age of 25". This statistic is based on surveys conducted by the graduates of various colleges and universities. My understanding of the results are: of all the responding women, roughly 20% claim to have been raped. If the sample of women attending University and/or responding is representative of the population as a whole, then the original claim makes sense.

More to the point, refuting the single study, voluntary survey at one US university campus.

Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation Poll. "the poll surveyed a random national sample of 1,053 women and men ages 17 to 26 who were undergraduates at a four-year college — living on campus or nearby — or had been at some point since 2011. They attended more than 500 colleges and universities, public and private, large and small, elite and obscure, located in every state and the District of Columbia." [...] "5 percent of men and 20 percent of women said they had been sexually assaulted in college"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/local/2015/06/12/1-in-5-wom...

Campus Climate Survey Validation Study
" Surveys were completed by more than 23,000 undergraduate students (approximately 15,000
females and 8,000 males). The average response rate across all nine schools was 54% for females and 40%
for males"
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ccsvsftr.pdf
I don't understand. What's the relationship between one person's dating strategy and another person's dating strategy? What's about gays?

Also, I don't see why, for instance, there wouldn't be something like a population where everyone only tries to date as many people as possible. Are you assuming that people wouldn't ever date the same person again?
The crux of your comment is "offense" at the implication (correct or otherwise) that your looks reflect the price category you had in mind, because you can see the alternatives. (What about a shop owner directing you to a gender-specific department based on your looks? What about a shop owner directing you to the jeans section because you're wearing jeans?)

You can see the expensive products you're not being offered. Online, you don't see the alternatives. So you're less likely to get offended.

But here's the rub. You just don't buy.

In a brick-and-mortar situation (if you can get over the offense), you might say, "Actually, I'm looking for a diamond-encrusted Rolex and have the bank account to prove it--nevermind my ripped Slayer t-shirt." And the store could pivot and sell you that Rolex.

Online (and this is the difference between sales and advertising), you're not looking for what's being offered (say, a Seiko), so you don't click. You don't even enter the store. They didn't lose a customer: they lost a lead because of bad targeting. And remember that advertising is binary: you you want to buy this [Y|N]? Advertisers would love you to answer questions about your price points and interests, but you won't tell them directly (you won't), so they use what you have told them indirectly about yourself to guess.

Online advertising does care about fairness or "segmentation" (read: discrimination). They don't care that you didn't get shown the "expensive products" (that you probably wouldn't buy anyway), and if you happened to have been a potential customer, losing you as a specific lead is just noise if the targeting is 95% right otherwise. Law of large numbers: who cares about you?

Now, I want to tweak my targeting, and if it turns out guys in ripped Slayer t-shirts are great candidates for sales of my diamond-encrusted Rolexes, then I update my targeting, and everyone is happy. (Except for the guy who really wants to be offered a Rolex because it would make him feel good... even though he'd never actually buy one.)
> The problems with cost are real, but it's more from flight restrictions than drag

No one is arguing that that isn't the case; as the article points out, the legislation addresses both the flight restrictions and the noise rule that the article claims functionally requires engine designs which increase drag.
> "Any programmer could write a fairly good test suite for "sort". However, I highly doubt they could write the implementation."

I mean, any developer should be able to write a sort. They might end up with some O(2^n) behemoth, but they should be able to do it.
Show HN: Ai-powered TV channel
> You're probably talking to them as an obvious American, and they are backing down and downplaying it to hide it

Not sure how do you get that. I suppose you do not have the super power to read mind.
Yahoo wrote down around $700M of the investment. In other words, Yahoo has stated publicly to shareholders that Tumblr is only worth $300M.
Switch hands! Give your current hand some time to heal and then alternate hands day-by-day. This cuts the workload in half.
I don't know if it was done similarly in every case in every country, but my experience is that the customers became shareholders (with an option to sell the shares immediately, which I guess almost everyone exercised).
Insurance companies used to run as mutual companies. Part of insurance is investing all that money.
A lot of mutual companies become pseudo public companies so they could access cheap capital then grow faster. Of course once nationwide grew as big as they did they went private.
No, they've been trying for years. Though often times its just a cynical ploy to push a specific coding language onto a young demographic hoping to lock them in as a user base later on
>Can you manage a tech company without understanding technology?

Definately. Most managers pride themselves in that they can manage anything. The usual bad results, when that happens in an non-production company, are not mentioned.

>How come we're not innovating more on the structure of those companies?

Inovating on human nature, usually results in delusions and hatred on other humans, resulting in murderous cults and political movements. But dont you worry, funny experiments happen all three generations, and then never again.

Leviathancybernetics is complicated, and the resulting, highly innovation producing constructs would be described by most people here as a pit of missery.

And lets not forget, funny games with human nature are also highly dependent on a constant economic surplus. We do not behave rational when times get tough. (Although we constant claim to be).

Humanity is no plane- humanity is a supertanker, with a very huge turn circle and lots of fragile components. Whoever wants to manipulate this- good luck.
In a few years, no investors are going to be looking for AI startups
> Their employer has 0% loyalty to them. Their employer would stab them in the throat for 50 cents.

You don't know that. The fact that he's asking this question means he thinks they have more than 0% loyalty. If you knew they had zero loyalty and would fire you upon disclosure of the automation you wouldn't concern yourself with ethics.

I see what you are saying but it's still bad faith from my perspective. If you automate part of your job you should celebrate that and figure out somewhere else to add value. He's being paid a full time wage to provide technical expertise as a professional. To withhold that expertise they are paying for is unethical in my opinion. He's taking advantage of the company's lack of knowledge in the space and also taking advantage of "working" remotely.

However, if I was him, I'd try to figure out if I could fire up an LLC and license the script back to the company for maybe $1-2k/mo and then go do the same thing for other similar businesses. He could potentially make more, come clean, and still get to his goal of spending more time with the family based on his mailbox money.

So he could move to full time contractor (so he can write off his home office or whatever). "Write" the script. Inform the company that he automated it and would like to license it to them. Even that is somewhat unethical because the company should own the script, but at least he can move on and get rewarded for his initiative.
If you can code python, why would you go into teaching? That's basically the issue schools are facing; anyone who's really qualified can make more money elsewhere
Yes there is some duplication of TCP capability here.

The problem with relying on TCP for reliability is that its state is in memory, associated with a particular peer IP address, and acknowledgements passed back to the sender only indicate that the receiver has the data in local memory, not that the data has been processed.

A file download over TCP can fail, for example due to a network problem. Ensuring reliable delivery requires additional measures outside of TCP, such as retrying the download using a new connection.

In practice, this means that TCP is primarily useful for providing flow control and offering a streaming interface (no worry about packet sizes). Less so as a complete solution for transmission reliability.
My job is upgrading and maintaining 911 and other life safety systems.

The article is correct, advancing technologies are not reflected by additional capabilities by PSAPs, DISA's or ILEC's (The ppl that foward your call to a responder). It was only recently that IP based 911 sending of ANI/ALI (Telephone/Location data) data has been implemented on a large scale. In Canada, it ran on an old packet switched network for ages!

Their are different flavors of 911. E911 (Enhanced), V911 for VoIP phones, and recently the addition of Wifi based calling among others. The original 911 systems was designed when phones were static, they didn't move. Nowadays, with cell, voip and now, wifi devices, theirs no telling where the call (device) originates from. Yes, most send long/lat data, but that is based on triangulation of cell towers and not accurate enough. To further complicate things, long/lat doesn't take into account altitude. In a urban setting, the responders maybe at ground level wondering just which building and floor originated the call (yes, their systems to deal with this but not widely implemented, and, failing that, if the caller is unable to speak, you have a larger issue).

Most responders don't even have the ability to map a long/lat. So at this point, the accuracy is moot.

All that being said. The E911 system works well. Cell/VoIP/Wifi, not so much. The call will generate a response, but it's hardly efficient.
> a lot of young people in the west are railing against democracy, free speech, and other laws that support their freedom

[citation needed]
I've intermittently had the same problem. Some basic habits you can change to help:

Cmd-Tab (and Ctrl/Shift-Tab) should not be done with one hand! Hold down Cmd with your right hand and hit tab with your left. This one change probably helped my "tendonitis claw" more than anything else. Similarly, other keyboard shortcuts should involve holding down the opposite modifier key from the key being pressed.

Let your fingers float above the keyboard. A lot of people rest their wrists on the wrist-rest and try to type; this puts a lot of pressure on the carpal tunnel, and means you have to curl your fingers more.

Two-finger scroll with your wrist & upper arm, not your fingers. It should be a really subtle movement, too, just a few millimeters displacement.

Editor wars aside, vim is better than emacs (& TextMate etc, though emacs is the worst offender) for RSI. Modal editing doesn't require that you hold down modifiers.

Take thinking breaks. When your code is compiling or you have a tough problem, get up and walk around instead of cmd-tabbing to a blog.

Don't let yourself get mad or frustrated at your code. Get up and take a walk or talk to someone instead. This is actually pretty challenging, because I've found that intensive coding tends to shut down the emotional processing parts of my brain. But that's also why it's dangerous: when you aren't consciously processing emotions, they can often get "stuck" as muscle tension; your back and shoulder muscles might remember that you were mad, or your fingers that you were frustrated, even though consciously you don't. Relaxation or meditation exercises can help get muscles un-stuck, but ideally you should be relaxed whenever you're typing.

If all else fails, switch to Dvorak. It's somewhat better for finger-movement than Qwerty, although I'm not sure the benefit outweighs the switching cost unless your fingers are really bothering you.
I agree completely.

In European/Anglo countries, the ruling elite give back. Check out Grand Central, Rockefeller Center, the large parks and gardens throughout the great countries of the world. The ruling elite in Asia don't care about others.
Nice writeup. Certainly scratches the surface a bit (and I think that was the intent). I've spent the bulk of my career in the industry, both in P&C and A&H, and there is a ton of opportunity. You correctly conclude that it's not because we're idiots, even though some days I'm kind of an idiot.

Again, tons of opportunity, with some barriers that aren't unique to the industry but maybe unique to what the tech community might encounter (and this is by no means an exhaustive list) -

1. Capital requirements: You need a dumptruck full of money to do much in this industry, at least if your intent is to write or reinsure business, but even to a lesser degree if you're working in ancillary services.

2. Regulatory environment: Assuming US operations, 50 states with 50 different sets of regs need to be okay with what you're doing. In addition, federal law comes into play in certain spaces (GLB, HIPAA, etc).

3. Distribution: The current model compensates every layer of the distribution model very well. It's not as easy as you might imagine to disrupt when entrenched interests are all making a ton of money AND are interdependent upon their neighbors in the value chain to continue to do that. You can't just hack a piece off because that bothers their neighbor, who in other circumstances might otherwise be a competitor, but has a shared interest. The relationships get complex.

None of this is fatal, but you must navigate it and play by many of the rules, particularly with #2. As Zenefits learned very publicly, the insurance industry and its regulators weren't going to let someone do what Uber did to the taxi industry - which was essentially to operate in the grey/black and just ignore the calls to stop. Insurance is a subset of financial services, and financial services is a powerful industry. For any startup, my advice is to build compliance and regulatory relations in from day 1. It's the least exciting thing you'll ever do, but is extremely important. Anyhow, I'm rambling. By no means do I want to discourage anyone from trying, I'm just trying to highlight some of the big things that are "different" in our space.

I'm particularly interested in the data piece because that's what I've done and built a career on in this industry, but it never struck me as sexy enough for YC. Appreciate the article.
You called the previous poster's exaggerated example a strawman, then made an inappropriately detailed response to an argument that wasn't being made in the first place.
I appreciate that many of you (including the article author) are coming at this question with a lot of experience. I, however, knew very little about coding a year ago and learned with TDD as part of how I build almost every project. Although I think it's always the case that I might "be doing it wrong", it's hard for me to imagine now writing code without first writing tests. Part of this is, admittedly, that I'm still uncertain if my solutions or code will even work and writing tests helps me to both organize what I want to do and also verify that I haven't made silly syntax mistakes.

Was it harder to learn this way? Absolutely (at least I think so, but my sample size is 1). I can't tell you the state of despondency I was sometimes in learning test suites and trying to figure out how to test certain things all while knowing that I could just write the stupid code and inspect the output to see if it was right.

Also, I love to refactor. How do you refactor if you don't have tests to catch you when you break something?
I've moved three times in the last 12 months, and will move again in three months. Unfortunately, Feather is unlikely to be available in my country (Spain) in the near future.
if you fly to another country, you will be subject to roaming fees. In that case, it maybe easier to just hail a cab depending on which country you are in
I agree on what people are saying regarding the pricing; however, be sure to compare apples to apples. Part of the value-add in this is it comes complete delivered and ready to use, and hauled away at the end.

If you've ever had to borrow vehicles/friends or go up flights of stairs, spend an evening assembling, or wade through buyers in classified ads to get rid of it, you know that has value as well.
Outlaw Country: CIA Linux Kernel Malware
As no party affiliation
I'm also interested in this question, chiefly because the quotes do not seem purely "random", as some media are describing them - even in the sense of syntactically correct but random - and because there doesn't appear to be readily available information from the creators.
I'm an Airbnb host. I rent out the guest house behind my house. I have one of those realtor keyboxes so I don't have to be around for guests to check in and out. My Airbnb calendar is setup to sync with my cleaner's ical. I pay my cleaner over PayPal. I use Handy to fix problems as they come up (they can use the keybox to get in too). I use BeyondPricing's dynamic pricing as it's better than Airbnb's dynamic pricing. It ends up being not much more work than having a regular tenant for quite a bit more money.
Let's say I want to learn an editor in and out, is it worth to learn Vim now or should I invest my time in Sublime?
That is true, although I was left with the impression that in many cases it was due to luck. Older weapons with poor safeguards ended up in service far longer than was reasonable and the addition of necessary safeguards was resisted at nearly every level.

There were also many stories where a weapon was dropped during loading or caught in a fire, etc., and the general idea seemed to be that it could just have easily ended up in disaster.

The story of the Damascus incident, which served as the framing story for the rest of the book, also seems relevant. In that case there were procedures to ensure safety but over time the reasons for these procedures seemed to have been forgotten or the knowledge inadequately passed on to newer team members. Old equipment (like HAZMAT suits) were allowed to get old, rendering them useless. Many people in the administration chain had weak or little knowledge of the facilities... And then there was an accident where a small mistake compounded into pretty scary incident.
The current political talking point is that the private sector can do it cheaper. Which is exactly what you get with contractors: A mandate to pick the lowest bidder, and to not let it languish in RFP (by lobbying, typically).

France has the right model with nuclear power creation and generation through a vertically-integrated state owned company, Areva. Our stockpile has to be an effective deterrent. We shouldn't trust contractors with our stockpiles, that process should be vertical too, damn the costs involved.
The entire pursuit of "thought leadership" is a joke. If someone purposefully seeks thought leadership then they are probably incapable of truly demonstrating it. Thought leaders don't try to become thought leaders, they become so by focusing on their areas of expertise
Unfortunately TDD has become a band-aid for lack of constructs that should be a part of the language in the first place.

A language that allows you to express the spec could be so much more useful.
If you have to support older clients--definitely, SAN is your only option if you have to run on the same host. (And I sympathize, because that sucks.) At that point, though, my inclination becomes to attach a bunch more public IPs and wire up my DNS correctly to match.

> Can you elaborate what you mean here?

Me saying "this cert is valid for example.com, foo.example.com, and bar.example.com" is an incrementally better security posture than saying "this cert is valid for *.example.com". It constrains an attacker from running a phishing attack from, say, "private.example.com" or "secure.example.com". You're whitelisting what you're covering by explicitly declaring all of them.

It is incremental, but it's a thing.
I find subscriptions to be a mixed bag. For something like TV/Movies subscription makes sense in general. Most consumers will watch once and then watch something else and this subscription rental service is cheaper than direct buying what you would use.

With technical books, this is a pretty hard sell at the Safari prices. The lowest cost option is $39/month for one user. It's pretty difficult to justify that as I need to read a minimum of one technical book per month, and all of those books would have to be ones available in Safari.

I've used Safaribooks in the past because an employer paid for the team, and I thought it was quite good, but it isn't good enough to replace all of my technical book needs, nor is it worth $39/month.

I, like the parent, have directly purchased quite a few books directly from O'Reilly online in the past. The nice thing was that unlike Amazon I could count on updates if there were corrections and such. Now I will just look elsewhere for books and O'Reilly just loses my money.

Also; IMHO, the O'Reilly article is nothing but PR spin. How is this reinventing anything? Safaribooks has been around for 16 years as a subscription service. There is nothing new here; all they did was kill off a sales channel. That's pretty much the opposite of invention.
The idea that the modal experience of residents of Magna Carta-era England (that was long before "Britain" could be said to correspond to any political entity) was anything approaching "freedom" is laughable. Peasants were peasants everywhere, and the main determinant of their well being and freedom was whether there was a natural disaster recently and, to a lesser extent, technological development.

Hunter gatherers and nomadic societies were more free. Probably the Highlanders of Scotland experienced a lot more "freedom" than anyone governed by the Magna Carta. Though that ended with the British government's campaigns to subjugate the region in the wake of the Jacobite rebellion.
I am a JavaScript developer. I also have 0 worry about competition in the job market. It isn't that I am a rockstar programmer, that JavaScript developers are hard to find, or even that demand is low. Unfortunately, it is that most JavaScript developers suck. Absolutely horrid.

The primary culprit is a lack of education (formal or mentor-ship) on how web technologies work and I have almost never encountered somebody who did well with these technologies due simply to their university education. If you are hoping your mastery of Java or C# is good enough to quickly jump into JavaScript or some other web technology will be sorely disappointed.
Is this total BS then?:

"Why pay for something that’s free, you ask? When a user visits a website that is secured with a self-signed, or free SSL certificate, most web browsers will post an error message. While some people will click “I understand the risks” and proceed to your site, it’s likely that many people will click the “Get me out of here!” button and never return.

The real problem lies in the fact that self-signed certificates are virtually unregulated. If your site is compromised, it may still appear secure; however, certificates issued by a trusted certificate authority can be revoked and therefore alert users of any potential threats."

Source: http://searchengineland.com/comprehensive-guide-ssl-certific...