skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm talking North Dakota weather. Three inches of ice on the roads, but fuck it they plowed, and that's the weather of the city and nobody gives a fuck and no businesses are closing. Not like Dallas where a quarter of an inch of just slushy snow could shut down the entire Metroplex, I'm talking harsh Winter.

I know about tolerance. From my personal experience I actually very much enjoy actively smoking a blunt while I'm driving down the highway or interstate. But it's still impairment. I am still not of my regular faculties while driving. Even if my regular faculties are wrecked with anxiety and more likely to get me in to an accident. Regardless, if, for whatever reason, anything should so happen and I wreck, it automatically becomes my fault. No ifs ands or buts about it in the face of the current law. And I can't readily defend against that, I think that's the right call.
What about A E I O U
Location: San Francisco, CA

Remote: No

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: HTML/CSS/Javascript, Adobe CC, python, C

Resume:
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/2a785c_708eb81d3cc34fd99f088e...

Email: mting780 [at] gmail.com

I'm a UX designer (graduating with Bachelors in Cognitive Science and Art in 2018, concentration in Human Computer Interaction) looking for a Fall internship/co-op position in San Francisco, preferably with a startup or something involving VR/AR technologies. I've served as a UX/UI Design Intern at EA for the past two summers and worked on multiple freelance projects. I'm curious and learn quickly.
Indeed. The example how how to do it "right" (in production) in c++:

https://sourceforge.net/p/loki-lib/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/incl...
> But if everyone does that, that inherently pushes up the price of company A a lot faster than company B.

Can you explain how this works?

Suppose Company A is worth $100 billion and Company B is worth $10 billion. Buying $100 of Company A and buying $10 of Company B shouldn't push up the price of Company A faster than Company B. You're buying 0.0000001% of each company so you'd expect that you'd push up the price of both companies at the same rate.

> The minimal impact of cap weighting is actually that you don't have to rebalance your investments to keep them tracking the same. By them going up and down, they keep the same percentage by market cap weight.

Yes this is another benefit of cap weighting.
It uses the FaaS Framework (https://github.com/alexellis/faas) which bills itself as "a serverless framework for Docker"
I agree we're not to over indexing in the US, but I think people really have to keep watching the central banks, especially Japan and the BOJ [1]. While the US federal reserve doesn't buy stocks, other central banks do, and a lot of them use indexing/ETFs. The swiss national bank also has a fair amount of US stock holdings.[2]

Given how the central banks act, this affects the currency markets and interest rates.

(1) https://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Equities/Japan-s-central-ban...

(2) http://www.businessinsider.com/swiss-national-bank-owns-80-b...
I am going to pretend my previous post was poorly written so as not to offend your sensibilities.

When political activists, regardless of who they are and what they're against, want to ban a meeting because someone they disagree with is going to make a speech there, when they invade a venue with bullhorns so loud people have to leave, when they're sending death threats, or starting physical altercations, or setting things on fire, they're not behaving like progressives or conservatives, but like fascists. Regardless of what side of the aisle they're claiming to be from. Physical suppression of opposing speech is in fact textbook fascism.

There are legitimate ways to protests people and ideas you disagree with in a democratic society: boycotting an event. Writing against it. Picketing or demonstrating/counter-demonstrating. Rest assured you don't have to give them any trophy.

But what adults do is, and I know this is going to sound shocking, they talk to each other. Noam Chomsky debated William F. Buckley. William F. Buckley debated Gore Vidal (and famously lost in the eye of the nation by precisely failing to uphold civilized discourse). Malcolm X debated Martin Luther King Jr, and Martin Luther King Jr debated James J. Kilpatrick. Here in 2017 Cenk Uygur debated Ben Shapiro (...yes, this does not have the same ring to it as 1960s debates).

It is quite embarrassing that, almost 60 years ago, Doctor King could debate a segregationist on live television, while a visible segment of today's youth is reduced to hysterically yelling into a bullhorn (or worse) until people are forced to leave, just because of the perceived slight that someone is going to give a speech.

As a European who knows political trends tend to spill over across the ocean (both ways. We're still sorry for having given you a case of Acute Thatcherism, America), I am quite worried to see fascists not being opposed and denounced by the left simply because this time they are advancing under the mask of progressivism.
Where'd the sudden money come from to back Bitcoin cash? Who put in the initial currency valuation? Did you watch the quick and near-parity change in price between Coin and Cash, only for Cash to suddenly double and then drop right back toparity with BC, then the jump to over 3,000 on Coin to nearly-mirror the needed missing reserve to back Cash?

It's pretty simple - follow the money. The pattern is BEYOND evident.
When you're tasting yoghurt, it's tasting you.
Yeah, I was about to say that it's probably largely because of the policy relief under Fortuño and to some extent his successors. Like how you would expect people to have returned to Detroit if they would make the occasional policy decision which doesn't involve spending more of other people's money.

It's pretty interesting to see how this works out within the U.S. when it comes to personal income tax[0]

[0]: http://www.howmoneywalks.com/irs-tax-migration/
Don't write C argument parsers in C
Fears for tourists in London as acid attacks escalate in recent weeks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elder_Thing
If I didn't think the parent I was replying to was suggesting exactly that, then I wouldn't have made the reply I did.
facebook's desktop revenue (1.2b q2 2017 vs .9b q2 2015) has not been as robust as mobile, the lions share of their revenue and revenue growth is in mobile (8b q2 2017). its very easy to imagine that evaporating away very quickly in some economic event, especially considering mobile ads haven't really helped companies much (from what I have heard).

even google could suddenly become a lot less profitable very quickly. many of the 260~ unicorns spend a lot on ads, a revenue stream that could disappear quite suddenly.

i'm not saying its likely, just that it could reasonably happen
It's interesting to think about what would happen if the Great Firewall were to just disappear. Are we getting to a point where the Chinese giants are too entrenched in China and the global giants are too entrenched globally, such that even without the Great Firewall there would continue to be separate online worlds in China and the rest of the world?
In and of itself, I don't see much wrong with it. Agile itself does not seem to be the problem.

Problems arise when it is heavily abused and applied incorrectly by management, in my experience. My first time doing Agile (well, SCRUMM, but bear with me here) was someone using it to manage multiple unrelated projects at once. Predictably, it crashed a burned miserably. The person who decided on it was suckered by the buzzwords but failed to actually understand the purpose of the process.

My current company uses SCRUMM quite effectively, and it's been a wildly different experience. It probably helps immensely that the people in charge are also developers.
Exactly. These fictional UIs are designed for a single end - to look good on camera. I think there is an inverse correlation between "cool" and "useful" - the "cool" often distracts from the "useful". While this kind of UI could work for something trivial like a simple calculator or alarm clock, in my experience it does not work for serious applications. As works of art however, these things are a beauty to look at - http://sciencefictioninterfaces.tumblr.com/

I had this idea first back when I saw Star Trek The Next Generation and its slick flat computer panels, called "okudagrams" after their designer, Michael Okuda - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS. I tried to reproduce the look in a note-taking application. It didn't work. The UI was dominated by these large colored buttons and arches, with too much contrast against the black background, leaving too little room for the actual content.
Reddit was significantly more US focused and political than I remember. Wasn't surprised to see a Ron Paul article up at the top, but I remember more technology and programming type articles.

It does show how much nicer the front page was when it wasn't full of low effort pictures because image hosting sucked until imgur came along.
Pretty sure some android versions or phones let you delete the documents and data, whereas on iOS you have no freedom to clear the cache manually. It only happens when you run low on storage.
That's the difference between primary and compound emotion. Compound emotions need to be broken down more to see what the root cause is.
I agree with that based on my personal experience so far.Sometimes I want to be alone not being disturbed or interrupted by other people.But my friends will think that something happened to me, in reality I just want to be alone without any company.

In other time I talk to people, go out and enjoy with friends.

Again most of the time I like be alone doing what I like to do.
I'd like to attempt to do a complete end run around the impending anecdote war and ask: how the hell are academic professors, lecturers, staff, and students agreeing to serve in a position of power where they make recommendations/findings/whatever on potentially criminal acts by university students without having any expertise whatsoever in criminal law?

If one sits on a university panel and is shown evidence that one student raped another student, how is one's next action not to go to the police station and hand over that exact same evidence?

If one is not being shown any actual evidence, how can one possibly rationalize participating in such a proceeding?

If you are an academic and have served in this capacity, please explain to me how your decision was motivated by anything other than a desire not to rock the boat. Please also explain how serving in a non-expert position of power over students who have potentially committed criminal acts is compatible with being a humble and conscientious scholar.
You care to back up those data loss claims with any proof?

I agree that this smells a bit funny, but the author seems to dance around the important topics like vpools, raid levels, and use case. Instead they just focus on the hardware, which is arguably the least interesting bit (until you know the former).
Reminds me of the good old days with Powwow. I've seen this idea come and go (and even wrote my own version), but I've found that although this kind of letter-by-letter communication is literally 3-5x more efficient, only a small percentage of users choose efficiency at the cost of displaying their poor typing and spelling skills.

About efficiency, if you think I'm exaggerating, imagine for a moment that phone calls didn't exist, but that every phone conversation required recording and sending a voice mail. Imagine how ridiculously slow and inefficient that would be. Well, that's instant messaging, the most inefficient method of communication ever devised. Millions of users stare at their Slack chats, waiting for "So and so is typing" for minutes, until finally So and So just gives up and ends up writing nothing at all. ;)
> What it means is that you mind find more men interested in, and excelling at, particular fields compared with women, who have complementary interests and excellence in other fields.

Men are in control of these fields. Men do not have to face the discrimination and harassment that women must face to work in these fields. There is significantly less friction for men to enter and rise at Google than there is for women. If people were truly considered equal, that friction would not be there and there would be equal representation at the very top. Making that friction go away is what Google is trying to do, and this manifesto does exactly the opposite. I doubt you'll find many women who appreciate the fact that they are considered "more neurotic" by a male engineer at Google.

Engineering is not inherently male or female. Women are not worse at spatial reasoning or maths or programming. Bullshit thinking like this leads to discrimination in those fields.

> Where does the manifesto author restrict anyone's rights?

By writing the manifesto he advocates for a system that would.

By making the assumption that biological differences account for inequality leads to the thinking that biological differences justify inequality. (I get the sense that this author believes that but is just shy of saying it.)

The author has the privilege of not having faced discrimination the same way a woman would have faced in his place. By writing this manifesto blind to that privilege — and then coming to the conclusion that it's "biological differences" and that women are simply "wired differently" — for why they are paid less, and in less senior positions, simply propagates the existing discriminatory system. A system which discriminates against the rights of others.

Let's lay out a ridiculous assumption made by the original author:

> We always ask why we don't see women in top leadership positions, but we never ask why we see so many men in these jobs. These positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life.

This implies that women are less capable of dealing with stress. Most of my searching on this suggests the opposite, that women deal better with stress than men. But then, the question of gender and stress seems incredibly complicated and the original author has used a simple and blind assumption which favours his ego and supports his position. His entire piece is written like this.
> Beyond the two harmless use cases given previously, a headless browser can also be used to automate malicious tasks. The most common cases are web scraping

I guess I disagree with the premise of this article.

How is web scraping fundamental malicious?

What rights/expectations can you have that a publicly accessible website you create must be used by humans only?
"triggers that fire based on conditioning"

If one is living by reaction, or conditioning, it's as if one's behaviour is a series of reflex actions - the world tapping on your knee. Sure, it's "you" in a sense, this "you' is unique and has a "personality". But since it's only operating on the outer layer of your nervous system, is it really "you"? Different, and less.

I've noticed that it's not so much my choices that conform, but the way of thinking about them, the value system, the set of choices. My own thinking can evaporate, a dream on waking.

I stressed that "if". It's not necessary to live by reaction. There's a famous quote about this difficulty of keeping the independence of solitude while in the world... (Kipling?)
There are no libertarian issues involved in this kerfuffle. This is a corporation, a free association of people, and an individual. If Google wants to shitcan the OP, von Mises is silent on the subject. The big bad state of CA is silent on the subject as well. And I don't think any classical liberals would find a kindred spirit in him regardless of how he labels himself.

Also, he does say Stop alienating conservatives. So let's get that charade over with and just call him a conservative and dispense with any libertarian nonsense.
Been running an 8 drive array for nearly 5 years now myself and never once had an issue through 3 PCs and 3 different operating systems. What was your issue?
That's probably because their design doesn't do much to mitigate it.
>it has many flaws and inaccuracies

Can you expound on these a bit? Seemed like most of the adverse responses were appeals to emotion rather than dealing with the statements and I'd like to hear a rational critique of the issues.
And women are much more severely underrepresented in tech. So why argue against fixing that? It will simply make the tech industry better.
> It makes no sense at all

It's the Dictator's Response. At the first sign of trouble, silence the troublemakers, because if there's no smoke, then there's no fire.

Responding to a security threat like this requires funding. Funding requires spending political capital, and funding firefighting requires spending political capital on something which isn't a "feature" or an "achievement", so it's a negative for the manager in charge. It's best if the problem "just went away"...
Thanks! Great questions. I’m not 100% confident about supporting static generation and Discus integration with Ghost 1.0, although I imagine it’s feasible. That said, I’m personally not interested in pursuing either for my own blog at this time. Maybe in the future.
> All robots forbidden, except googlebot

After which people keep claiming google search is better, not just given special treatment.
The annual SeaFair air show is over Seattle this weekend with many different military aircraft circling overhead all weekend.

http://www.seafair.com/events/2017/seafair-weekend

Also, McChord Air Force base, North America's largest air force base, is about an hour south of Seattle.
i would pay for this - as a HUD for company stats
> Suppose Company A is worth $100 billion and Company B is worth $10 billion. Buying $100 of Company A and buying $10 of Company B shouldn't push up the price of Company A faster than Company B. You're buying 0.0000001% of each company so you'd expect that you'd push up the price of both companies at the same rate.

Sorry, you're totally right. The prices should increase in the same weighting when buying just like they go down in the same when selling.

The difference is that you're weighted by market caps, so you're increasing the P/E of the entire market (in a super small way). That is, you're not investing more in companies that are valued more "attractively" (lower P/E multiple) than those that might be "over valued" (high P/E), which is what the market typically does to determine prices.
Well, the problem there is that CRTs used a triangular-patterned phosphor screen, excepting Trinitrons which had their phosphors lined up in a row. How would you handle the missing spot for a phosphor in a hexagonal arrangement? I guess with current tech, we could make ultra-fine phosphor groups that we'd not be able to see. an 8K CRT at 32" would be quite nice .
I don't know how one does real OOP, but I know what C++ OOP looks like when used long enough.

1) Architecture. Architecture trumps everything. Even though "favor composition over inheritance" has been repeated for a very long time, some people just didn't get the memo, and you'll encounter mind-boggling inheritance hierarchies (sometimes even template inheritance, to make it fun) with more levels than circles of hell.

2) Class-itis. Everything must be a class, and free-floating functions are seen as coming straight from The call of Cthulhu. Most people are more concerned with the way the class will look and fit in the existing architecture than if the desired functionality is achieved.

3) Code reuse mania. If you write the same line of code in two different places, some people's palms start sweating. More than two identical lines in two different places and you'll have people screaming to move the coded to another place and share it, irrespective of whether it is beneficial or not.

4) God objects. When people just can't take it anymore and simply jam yet another object in the God object. Yes, I know a lot of people from the cult of OOP will tell you this is an anti-pattern, and I agree, but it happens. And when they unravel the God object, an even bigger mess emerges most of the time.

I don't know, I'm probably forgetting a dozen other manifestations of OOP.

You know what "you're not doing real Agile/OOP" sounds like? "You're not doing real communism". And we never will.
> Imagine that you got a letter from a stranger, telling you that the locks on your upstairs windows didn't work properly. How confident are you that you'd take it as a helpful suggestion, rather than being completely creeped out by this menacing weirdo?

If I were really creeped out, I'd be even more likely to spend effort making sure the locks on my windows are secure, as now I know there's a menacing weirdo looking at them, so I'd want to be extra sure he couldn't get it.
> We think of computer systems as inherently insecure until proven otherwise, but they see their system as fundamentally secure until someone comes along and breaks it.

Hmm, I think you're onto something. Maybe they just don't get that the vulnerabilities are already there, waiting to be exploited -- they think that the person they've heard from actually broke something that will now make it possible for others to get in. I guess if you don't know what's going on, that's as reasonable a theory as any.
I got to admit an OCD/perfectionism trait (out of many I will not all list) I used to have when I was younger... I would install say an Linux distribution on my computer and somewhere a few hours or days afterwards I would make a slight mistake in configuring it and I felt a level of discomfort that I must reinstall the whole thing from scratch. One summer I spend a good part of time doing this kind of stuff and getting no productive stuff done. Used to think it was normal behavior until I learned about OCD in a book by chance. I called my hospital and spoke to a psychologist and the CBT therapy worked great for me. Thankfully I've not had OCD compulsions since then. I just look back at my youth and how much time I wasted acting that way...
Color of Passion: Top Red WordPress Themes
People who responsibly disclose don't want fines applied, they want the bug to be fixed.

ICO is one path to make that happen.
Yet, if we look at Google's track record, they have much better luck with technical problems than with people-interaction problems. Search driven by algorithms - excellent. Social networks - epic fail. Advertising backend - money juggernaut, mostly driven by clever algorithms, as I understand? Mobile OS backend - great (well, ok, not too bad). Mobile OS frontend - meh. Chrome is kinda borderline, but I think technology has much more to do with its success then it having the best UX on the market. Shopping experience (outside of captive market of mobile users) - not too hot. Goggles - a flop.

In general, I feel if I am talking about a product from Google, I could expect a lot of very clever technology, but kinda basic UX. Sometimes it works - e.g. search works with basic UX just fine, that's what most people need. Sometimes people would just take the technology and add their own UX and that'd work fine too. But I personally get a feeling that Google's core competence is exactly in places that you are calling "hardly essential". Am I wrong?
Don't give unfair advantages based on gender/race, but do prioritize finding individuals of diverse gender/race whom meet your criteria. It will make you more successful in the long run.
I don't think the original author argued against fixing it, I think he advocated different approach to fixing it, based on different understanding of what "it" is.
This reminds me a lot of the game Antichamber: http://www.antichamber-game.com
Oh man, Powwow. I had completely forgotten about that. I believe ICQ had a similar live mode too. Thanks for the nostalgia trip :)
How's the internet there? I'd imagine that would be a significant barrier to productivity.
You know what, nobody cares about that anymore. Only those who desperately want to be seen as victims.
British model kidnapped in Milan 'to be sold in online auction'