skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, you cut human resources and organization can't grow or even retain its size.

>What else you want to do with them through the Internet? Would you rather censor them and their ideas away like they don't exist, exactly like they try to censor opposing views away in their territories of influence?

Isolate and make them unsure. Growth and spread is a thing that feeds their influence. Look, they produce nothing, they invent nothing. The only thing they do is growth. It is obviously just a cancer of idea. The word "extremism" already has a hint in it.

>How does that make us any better than them?

How is mushroom killing a bacteria better than bacteria? I don't know. It's just a way mushrooms are, maybe. Hypocritical bastards!

If seriously, I don't know why you're asking who's better/more right, because there is no absolute right. It is them or you, as it always was. Negotiation can't be done with your natural enemy.

I'm more from semi-eastern culture, if that matters.
Generating Art with Code: A Handbook to “Little Planet Procedural”
Your line of thinking implies that sans globalization the benefits of modern technology would not have achieved the same, if not better, without offering a scintilla of evidence for that self-affirming assertion.

Let's be clear here: the dissenting position that you dismiss (in an ad hom manner) as motivated by "envy and hatred" is critical of the unbelievably distored distribution of wealth and political power that has resulted.

We are concerned about the future generations, "friend".
for a completely diferent view on economics I recomend the book "Basic Economics"[1] written by Thomas Sowell [2] 704 pages without a single mathematical formula or graph.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Thomas-Sowell/dp/0465...
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell
Perl 6 has macros:

Copied from:
https://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/day-23-macros/

macro checkpoint {
my $i = ++(state $n);
quasi { say "CHECKPOINT $i"; }
}

checkpoint;
for ^5 { checkpoint; }
checkpoint;

No "homoiconicity". Just two operators: "macro" which will make a macro instead of a normal function, and "quasi" which says the stuff in here is code that shouldn't be evaluated. In lisp these two operators could be "defmacro" and "quote".

Lisp has a lot of features that other languages haven't implemented. We could spend all day asking why other languages haven't implemented them yet. And it's unfortunate, because just adding the feature for macros would allow you to add a lot of those other features. Indeed, macros are such a big deal that they are probably the sole defining reason that lispers can add features from other languages so easily.

However, we need to stop pretending that code substitution is some magical, genius feature that can only exist in the utopian environment of a common lisp system. It's a simple idea that's been used since before I was born. Macros in lisp are nice because you have so much access to the language, as well as (perhaps more so than any popular language) really smart tools for manipulating the data structure your code is written in. If you have to code code, if you have to write code that manipulates other code, it's nice if that other code is in an easy to understand data structure. And even easier if you already have a bunch of functions, classes, variables, etc given to you by the language for changing that data structure. Which lisp does, and that's what makes lisp lisp.
Still studying medicine, but working part-time as a lab assistant, teaching high school students biology twice a week and freelancing with R on small data analysis projects. Three cheers for multitasking!
I get it and I think it's very neat and solves a real problem. You guys are basically providing on-demand product evangelists right?
Be able to clearly reason about the space complexity of code.

Even quite short parts of code can have an unexpected (at least unexpected to me) explosions of thunks, and it's quite difficult (at least to me) to find out where/how strictness markers should be added so that the code wouldn't generate the totally unneeded gigabytes of temporary data that I see in the memory profiler.

It's quite easy to reason about the correctness and results of Haskell code execution, but it's hard to reason how exactly that code will be executed in ways that have an extreme effect on performance - not tenfold, but e.g. exponential relative to dataset size.
A month ago I went to a story telling event. There was one woman who came in the middle of the event, and went on the stage to tell her story as soon as she joined the group, without waiting or listening anyone else. She told a story about how she went to a beach, how she enjoyed, etc. Her personal experience of enjoying life. She talked about it like 10 minutes, then left the place without listening anyone else. She just wanted to tell 50 people how she enjoys the beach near her home, and also, asked the organizer of the event to record her 10 minutes speech with her phone, so she could put that video on Facebook. Narcissism in these days is in a level that people acts worse than celebrities, thanks to social media.
Are there any NON horror stories of micronanagers?
I take tons of pictures of my son. I don't feel the need to share them on Facebook, nor does my wife. If we want a group of people to see pictures, we send them the pictures directly.

People ARE way too addicted to that red notification symbol.
The parent comment never implied that anyone was forced to take a job at gun point. Why are you putting words into our mouths?

The parent comment implies that not everybody has a choice. This is true and this is not necessarily the same thing as being forced to take a job, much less at gun point.
I was really into this question a few years ago. I had quite a bit of existential angst about it as well.

I read Penrose, etc, but at the end of it could not find any plausible mechanism for humans having free will in the sense of uncaused causation. But I use a modified version of Daniel Dennett's take on it: we CAN choose, we just can't choose what we choose.

Another way of looking at it is to have two different "modes" for thinking of free will: in everyone's daily lives, they use the "traditional" view (how else could we have such things as moral praise or blame?), but when you look at the human brain as a physical system, you use the deterministic/pseudodeterministic view.
Comparing potential backdoors in proprietary systems with forced installation of spyware on endpoint devices?

I don't think they're the same.
> What does this pattern tell us? Doc wants to cut all your limbs to be sure you're not leaving his clinic, right?

Yes.
I'm not a Haskeller, but I frequently hear that Haskell (and FP languages in general) are very terse. Would 36 lines of Haskell not be able do more than 36 lines of C++ of JavaScript?

Anyway, in that regard, LOC is probably a bad metric. Unless the 36 lines of Haskell actually do more, and thus the Haskell/FP language actually allows you to be more productive. That'd be interesting.
Sure, but in silicon valley one thing to do with your smalltime IPO winnings is buy a house and rent out your old one to someone who has yet to hit paydirt. Maybe part of what pushes prices up, but I like to think my renters are getting a better deal than they would from old-man Irvine. (The incentives to play this game are razor-thin, mostly down to tax advantages.)
So how will people know just how vile ISIS is? Should be defer our judgement to main stream news media to tell us?

It's absurd that the Redirect company's mission statement is to "counter censorship" and their main job is to censor information.
Disclaimer: I am employed by the BBC, but not in PR, hence the throwaway

> The whole point of the TV tax is that the BBC can take on projects that are
> "worthy" but not commercially viable. Why does it have big-name stars at all?
> Why is it competing for ratings at all? They want to have their cake and eat
> it is why.

No, the BBC has to compete against commercial content, and therefore has to pay
to hire talent that is competitive with the talent hired by commercial
broadcasters. There are good reasons for this:

- Making popular content that is of high quality increases the quality of
commercial offerings, as it has to compete for viewers.

- If the BBC did not make popular content that most people want to watch, it
would not be perceived as good value for money, and therefore you would lose
the benefits of having a strong public broadcaster.

This is made clear in the charter:

"The BBC should provide high-quality output in many different genres and
across a range of services and platforms which sets the standard in the
United Kingdom and internationally."

> Working for the BBC is a privilege; one of the few cases where people really
> should be doing it "for the exposure" and not paid at all.

Working for the BBC is a privilege, but if it did not pay its staff, it would
not have any. There is a balance to be struck -- people are willing to work for
less than they could be paid elsewhere, but if the difference is too big then
they will leave.

The amount being paid to talent and execs is high, but at least in some cases
is a lot lower than people are being paid on commercial channels, and therefore
it is possibly justified.
Yes, it does.

But it could just be v1.. or it could be the govt describing a flawed approach so the resulting countermeasures are totally ineffective against the actual approach.

For example, if the actual approach is extracting keyframes and comparing against a library of keyframes of existing content (legal and illegal) or doing object recognition within those frames, the "add a null byte!" countermeasures are meaningless.
OP is Satoshi. Case closed. ;)
USDCHF: Sells Off, Extends Further Weakness
Huh, what do they have against it? I could see a linguist considering it too prescriptive, but in this case the whole point is prescribing a particular register of the language for effective communication. But what about the grammarians?
Heartily agree.

YouTube is trying to be Big Brother for us. What they don't realize is they're infantilizing all of their users by doing this.
> Programmer's can design interfaces, specailized to a problem, that may give the end user some flexibility in that problem.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about.

For example, moving all photos within a certain date range into a different folder could be done using a quick shell script. Only a programmer could do that, right? But then if you give an ordinary user a file manager where they can switch to a tabular view, click on the Date column to sort the files and then do a range selection, they can suddenly do it, without any programming ability.

There is a spectrum of kinds of tools, from a single button that says "Do it", to a simple form where you fill in some details and then click "Do it", to a toolbox where you can perform various actions in sequence, combining them freely to get to your goal (the file manager example), to a general-purpose programming language.

Along this spectrum, the increasing number of options makes the tool more powerful, but it also becomes more difficult to use, because the user has to make more decisions to arrive at their goal. Making the right decisions requires having a mental model of the effect these decisions have, and in the case of programming languages, this mental model is essentially equivalent to "programming skill".

However, not all problems that currently require a programmer to solve are really so hard, and it might be possible for an expert user with the right toolbox to do it just as well.

> However I fear that this perspective of yours is the same one which recurs at a certain level of mastery over a particular skill: to now no longer be consciously aware of all the things you need to know, and therefore to assume your highly adapted and sophisticated behaviour is not something that this been trained into you;

While I am not usually consciously aware of everything I know, I am aware that it required training to get where I am and that not everyone has this training or will ever have it.

For example, I know that there are people, generally quite adept at using computers, who would be unable to complete the file manager example I gave above; either because they don't know how to do one of the steps, or else because they could not mentally connect them to get from what they have to what they want.

However, I am fairly sure that there are more people who could do that than those who could write a program to achieve the same effect; that is what counts in my book. If you can move a problem from requiring an expert tool maker to only requiring an expert tool user, you should do it.

Regarding your plumber example: there is an "end-user plumbing system" that allows you to get running water and regulate its temperature by turning the right knobs, and everyone can learn to use it, no plumbing experience required.

Sometimes, not always, but sometimes, programming is like that.
In alphabetical order:

- http://firehose.datente.com - a bucket-load of RSS feeds

- Economist

- Facebook shares

- friends sending things directly

- Google+

- Hacker News

- local media

- Mastodon

- News app on iOS

- radio

- Reddit

- Twitter

And probably more I can't recall at the moment
Everything is replaceable, even and especially the large tech company. The constant reminder sure kills productivity though. People are more productive when they think companies actually give a shit about the hard work they put into the company.
Other (mostly European) countries rely on a tax to fund or partially fund state TV/radio so that the government doesn't broadcast government propaganda over state TV or control it by cutting their budget. It's also easier for them to make cultural shows as opposed to Oprah style reality TV that's the equivalent of clickbait and sells ads. In some of these countries state run TV is the most propaganda/advertising free TV. BBC is one example.
No CLI currently..I would probably leave that to the community to develop.
I'm curious about this book. Can you give me one small example of something in this book that helped you?
> Globalization is above and beyond all else a result of the Internet

I didn't downvote you, but the reason people are is probably that this is obviously wrong. Globalization began well before the Internet was commercialized.
Definitely. I made the mistake of buying an UltraSharp U2713HM which actually buzzed with lots of text on the screen (apparently it's a feature, just google the model). I tried swapping my new display and they sent me a refurbished one with dead pixels that buzzed also. I'm never buying Dell again.

This time around I did the right thing and went the more expensive route and got an Eizo and it's just absolutely perfect.
I read ~30 posts daily and I use tabs to postpone intreasting reads I've found through "open in new tab" on mobile. And anytime I'm doing any research I have 50+ tabs open usually.
Container shipping did a lot more for economic growth in the last 50 years than the Internet did.
The Non-Scientist’s Guide to Reading and Understanding a Scientific Paper
Is it possible that the game isn't zero sum? To lift a phrase from your second paragraph, is it possible that globalism favors wealthy owners of multinationals AND everyone else?

You're right to point out the risks of vast wealth disparities and the corrupting influence of money in politics, but I think that problem needs to be combatted separately, and not by making everyone less well off.
Nokia had something similar years ago : https://youtu.be/55Qdem9pJxY
> Reddit too closed down a couple of subreddits

It is disappointing what reddit has become in the past few years. From a genuine open platform to where the admins and the mods are now open and unabashed propagandists.

It is also scary how the traditional media has so easily forced social media to conform to their standards. The promise of social media was that it was the anti-traditional media. Unfiltered, raw, source and open discussion. Now reddit has adopted the exact same standards of traditional media and the rest of social media are following along.

> Extremist ideas need to be fought with rational discourse, drag them out into the open and let the sunshine disinfect them.

I agree. But it isn't just extremism. Look at how the admins are so openly anti-trump. They shut down subs that they disagree with ( alt-right ) and punished trump subs for "spamming". And yet, they openly support the dozens of anti-trump subs.

I'm a liberal who supports free speech and I loved reddit/social media that it allowed open raw discourse ( even if it offended me ). But what is happening to reddit and the rest of social media is really disappointing and quite frankly scary.
FLIF (http://flif.info) does this already but is far superior in many ways. All it lacks is a JS implementation.
How easy do you imagine not only finding information on how to follow through all of these steps, but actually acquire the needed materials (burners) within the strictly controlled PRC is?
MAL (Make a Lisp) in GNU Smalltalk
They don't have recurrent neural networks or most Deep Learning stuff. The closest to all these, IMO, is H2o Flow
Yes, but a hypocrite can still be right.
At Amazon, the Bathroom is an Extension of the Office (2015)
Some amount of distraction is probably helpful. Once you have gathered all requirements and have thought about the problem for a while it is good to let it marinate for some time. You will often have moments of insight seemingly out of nowhere while you are e.g. going out for a walk.
It's more progressive, yes, but when you look at the quality of output that the BBC produces the two really aren't comparable.

In the UK, I think we take the BBC for granted. With a fairly-limited budget they produce extremely high-quality and varied ad-free programming, news and have an excellent web presence. So many shows are exported and shown across the world, it can only be a benefit for the country to have our culture, and values projected in such a way.

Additionally, my two favourite stations are BBC4 and Radio 4. BBC4 shows a large number of niche documentaries that simply wouldn't ever be considered, let alone funded, shot and aired for other channels, and Radio 4 is simply unparalleled in quality.
You're doing liberty and democracy a disservice with your whataboutism. It's one thing to suspect your government of sneakily compromising hardware, another to receive official letters to install a surveillance app or be detained. Of course both are despicable, but they are not in the same league.

EDIT: I'm surprised about how many people jump to the defense of the Chinese government here on HN. Seems in stark contrast with the usual political opinion of the crowd. I can only ascribe this phenomenon to massive cultural relativism.
Japan Pictures Likely Show Melted Fukushima Fuel for First Time
Wow, great. I last looked in around march. I'll take a look as I'm currently unhappy with thrift.
At a push gravity trade might be considered related to macroeconomics but they're all really microeconomics, i.e. the branch of Economics that has made and continues to make progress.
Or as FA Hayek described it.. the "Pretense of Knowledge" -

> Hayek’s greatest contribution to economics was to show that society is far more complex than we realize, with little pieces of knowledge dispersed among millions of individuals. “The curious task of economics,” he famously wrote in “The Fatal Conceit,” which he published in 1988, “is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.”

> Recent government interventions suggest that politicians and bureaucrats today think they can design just about anything. This ignorance has backfired, as it always does, bringing with it what economists call “unintended consequences.”

Ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
This, and another theory states that V is kind of similar to an open hand, i.e. five fingers, making it a convenient abbreviation. Consequently, X is just two V's joined at the vertex.
Look for a different job? Work with a different team? Change your mindset from programming focus to a customer story focus? Start your own business?

If you don't feel driven within the environment that you're in, maybe it's time to look somewhere else. Or maybe it's okay not to go on these binges. Maybe it's best to scale back and put some of that energy into something else, like family, hobbies or whatever else might capture your interest.

Since we only get one shot at this, I think it's more interesting to change things up. We don't need to walk the same tired ground. There's always new territory to operate on. New challenges. Maybe your current situation is your gut telling you that you need to start working on different metrics rather than raw programming output.
This kind of appeasement, the idea of minding only the business of your own country, seems a bit indefensible to me.

And you cannot determine if one is a hypocrite just from a fact, there's no outrage, or can you? Many solves this problem their way, pointing out, talking about it, criticizing it and so forth.
I'm not happy with Gitmo either or the NSA's bullshit. Privacy and human rights violations like this by any government need to be stopped, every day it feels like we are treading closer to 1984 across the globe.
I believe in that instance, he did give stock to early employees, but left one of them out (probably because he wanted to be a dick). The rest of the early employees felt bad for the guy since he had been there since the beginning and Woz offered him some of the shares.
At the office we have a dozen QNIX 4K 32 inches monitors. They are not quite IPS, although it says it is, and they are $399 USD from eBay. Hard to beat that price. They are bright and they have DP & HDMI 2 ports.
Without knowledge of the minds of others, I can only assume they understand how Facebook works. For my part, if I consistently like pictures of your kid it means I want to see them on my feed.

Clearly there are people who don't like pictures of peoples' vacations or kids enough to bitch on Reddit about it. I'd call those people narcissists. Facebook is inherently about sharing things about yourself: your kid, your vacation, your new job, your walk by the river, even your political opinions. Almost nothing posted on Facebook is not self centered in some way. That's not inherently narcissistic. What narcissistic is when you post that stuff yourself, but can't empathize with others enough not to be annoyed when they do it.
"economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses." Thomas Sowell

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell
I am already wondering whether a fundraiser to download KG would make sense. If that would disappear... there is absolutely no collection like that, anywhere. 100 000 non mainstream movies!

If you all you want is a cold copy and not keep it online, the costs are not enormous perhaps 5K EUR or so.
Please link me up, I have checked and tried more than 20 results and none of them tell why or work.
Agreed. I often figure out a solution to a problem I'm having as soon as I stand up from my desk!
Or not even the government but the miners themselves... "Oh our connection is slow [stands strategically in front of router QoS settings]"
8 Leadership Lapses Every Business Owner Must Avoid
5K 27" displays are much less than this.
Chinazi
VCs want their portfolio companies within easy driving distance to facilitate multiple meetings per day.
> "Islamic extremism"

In Xinjiang region, the concern is more about separatism, which is not terrorism, and which should be a right of any group.

> "Anyone criticizing China while permitting their own country to do worse is an hypocrite"

One can be critical of their own government while still being critical of others. Even in US, ordinary people don't have much control over the government, in particular over the security state, other than complaining, so "permitting" abuses shouldn't be considered hypocritical.