skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, the CEO fluff on the ER call was amusing. Probably doesn't help to brand yourself the same thing as a food stamp program, but I digress.

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2017/08/11/analyst-caught-in-hot-...

I would dump that shit if I owned it.
And if you're arrested and don't have any social presence that's presented in the media as odd, unacceptable, if not antisocial.
What is point of this Backspace will return to first screen?!
Who made this? It is terrible ...
Reminds me of this 2010 New Yorker story about Saul Griffith:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/05/17/the-inventors-d...
Really shallow! 22 feet. That's within the range they let uncertified divers scuba at.
Correction: He did pay people to train him. That's different from hiring real trainers. See the word "real" in "real trainers"? It's part of their job to protect your key body parts during training.
This is one of the weirdest news stories lately.
Sorry, I meant the em sizing ignoring clamping, not the text zoom!
Universal Basic Income is a neoliberal plot to make you poorer
My opinion is that this is very surprising given their PR. When I think of Google's gender ratio in engineering I think "20% women".

If you look at their GitHub, it is immediately obvious that the skew is much more than that. I expect them to play it up a bit, but the actual disparity is insanely high.

I would not have predicted that women would account of only 5% of their open source developers and 1% of the contributions. And I'm still suspicious that something weird must be going on to get this result.
Would be nice to correlate analysts ratings that are similar to rare earth or chemical correlations to public companies here "Profiting from Python & Machine Learning in the Financial Markets" https://hackernoon.com/unsupervised-machine-learning-for-fun...
The problem with Bash functions is that they aren't really functions -- more like subroutines. You can't even return a value from a Bash function (just a numeric status code).

Most of the functions the author wrote wouldn't even be possible in Bash, if only because they utilize return values. So your suggestion that he "compare similar programming styles" is practically impossible without using implicit state-passing methods in Bash, which are much more awkward and error-prone than real functions.

Having said that, I agree that writing scripts in Python adds a lot of overhead over Bash, and should only be done if you are implementing significant complicated logic more than just I/O. (For example, retries, exponential backoff, business logic, exception handling, etc.)
This thread brings to mind an old quote:

What is object oriented programming? My guess is
that object oriented programming will be in
the 1980s what structured programming was in
the 1970s. Everyone will be in favor of it.
Every manufacturer will promote his products
as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip
service to it. Every programmer will practice
it (differently). And no one will know just
what it is.

Tim Rentsch, "Object Oriented Programming", SIGPLAN Notes, v17, n9 (1982).
I have two investment philosophies[1]:

- invest in things that help people be lazy and/or self centered

- invest in "evil" companies

Essentially invest in the shittiest components of being human wrapped up in a corporation.

All of my stocks besides Snap are up between 40%-800%. I'm banking on protein powder MLMs and camwhores cranking that Snap up over the next few years.

[1] I am not Warren Buffett or Michael Burry
I'm sad you've been downvoted. I loved this video.
It's like being really good at a video game that only you and maybe 2 other guys play.

You talk about the dungeons, monsters, level-bosses, etc but nobody can relate.
Unfortunately, the website I used to scrape the data only had 2 years of data. But each datapoint is looking at each individual analyst rating and price target for a stock and then comparing it to the price in 1 year. However, you are correct that datapoints during a downturn would be quite different.
Are you sure you are not the insane person? Walk away in either case...
Components do not belong to a system. Any system can access any component. Think of RDBMS stored procedures that operate on all rows matching certain criteria; don't think OO style encapsulated "methods".

The system only operates on entities that have all the components they need. So there won't be one rendering system but several: one for entities that require movement, one for those which do not, etc.
Rails, Django, Laravel, etc etc
One way I know they don't delete stuff is that I cleared my entire history using delete buttons. Unfriended everyone, removed all the events, etc. The account looked clean. I also cleaned the ad categories or how they call it. It's interests they gather from your activity that they use to serve you ads.

When I came back a few days later my ad interests were again filled with stuff obviously deduced from my posts that I deleted. Things I no longer care about, but posted in 2010, and obviously not visited recently, so they have no way of knowing what those interests are.

Facebook is engaging in scummy activities obviously. They call most of those removal buttons "Delete", not "Hide". They just lie left and right. Data take out should instead be called data poop out, because that's the quality of the format you get of the data you provided them over the years.

Actually that may be one of the less legal things they do. If you explicitly ask them to delete particular photo or whatever, they should delete it and not keep it to themselves. There may be for example issue with copyright. What if I posted something I don't have rights to and want to remove it? They obviously don't have right to it either, because I couldn't have given it to them.
No - the investors were willing to add $169.5M of value to the company by giving it $169.5M in cash.

The company is "worth" the same as it was before, plus $169.5M new cash in the bank.

In return, the investors received newly-issued shares at a price based in the pre-investment valuation of the company.

So there's no paying any "difference"; only increasing the valuation of the company by injecting new cash into it and creating new shares.
These or similar: http://prepinsta.com/amcat-automata-questions/
>Some are rooted, embedded in their communities; and some are trapped — because housing is unaffordable where the better paying jobs are. And the jobs that are high paying are not the jobs they built their lives on.

There's some texture and nuance to this statement. I remember on NPR, they interviewed a lady whom mentioned similar sentiments; her and her husband had built a family, worked in the blue-collar industry (precision machining) for decades, and now were losing their jobs. She also mentioned that they had been living in a small town for a long, long time.

That last part bothers me a lot. It seems a lot of people just don't want to move. Anecdotally I've moved nearly 6 times in the last 8 years. My parents have done the same.

People are stuck on this idea of living and dying in the same city once they buy a home or have children. That just isn't the case anymore.

Mobility and a willingness to learn new skills seems to prevail. It's what other generations have done, millions of immigrants (my parents included).
tl;dr I found a major ticketing vendor was vulnerable to data interception because of a faulty HTTPS setup. They issued a DMCA takedown of a private video I had sent them. I fought it and they threatened to sue but they backed down after the EFF sent a response on my behalf.
I'm more on your side than not when it comes to these bombastic claims. That said I think consumer level mind interfaces will happen, and be useful, but much more so as a way to augment traditional input.

It's a bit boring to think about, but given some of the research that has been able to reconstruct a (poor) image from brain activity, I could imagine using something like that to open applications by imagining their icon.

Continue down this line of thinking and it is entirely possible that we will begin to construct an entirely new symbolic language to interact with these interfaces. I mean if a picture is worth a thousand words, maybe it's more effective path to follow than obsessing over perfect speech recognition.
Which is why phone meta data is a big deal. Once you can cross reference numbers, locations, etc. patterns will emerge.

For example, you meet with someone every Saturday. At some point your colocation isn't a coinsidence, it's a relationship of some sort. Gather enough data and they'll know more about you than you do.
> In most cases, granting permission is an all-or-nothing affair. This means you cannot cherry-pick the permissions to grant or deny when installing an app. You either accept or decline.

I wish the author had spent a few lines to expand on this one so people would understand it better. This is a huge problem for those using older Android phones (which is a huge number worldwide) with Android 5 and below. With Android 6 (Marshmallow) and beyond, one can control specific permissions post app install (whereas the "all or nothing at installation" model applies to lower versions). AFAIK, this is also a problem on Windows phones, but that's quite a small percentage comparatively.

Those using iOS devices haven't had this issue for a long time because app permissions are granted or denied individually at runtime (this has also improved over time) and not during installation.

> The choices here involve four things:

>...

> Switch to secured and private decentralized social networks

The author mentions Nexus Social, but it still seems like it'll have decentralized storage only later next year. As of now, I don't know of any Facebook or Google+ replacements that are decentralized and help control/preserve privacy. There are simpler platforms to replace Twitter, like Mastodon. But a text-only platform will always remain a niche as far as social networking is concerned. We live in the age of memes, live videos and clips.

I personally would love to see a decentralized, feature rich and easy to use platform that preserves and allows control of privacy by the users (from others and the network), but at this point in time I don't have much hope for the next several years.
If you use YouTube, you are subject to the whims of that private corporation, regardless of whether it's right or wrong.

They should find a way to host the content somewhere else.
I mean, they could probably challenge requests that are obviously invalid like the Admiral one. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=can+you+copyright+a+domain+name (No, you can't)
Have they checked with YouTube to see if the files are actually deleted?

Like just because their gateway won't give you access to it doesn't necessarily mean that the bits have been scrubbed on the back end.

Also: here's a project to archive this information.

https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-7909-syrian_archive
Favicons in Safari for Mac? That's the least problem. They need to fix Safari on iOS so that it doesn't open the same site over and over again in a different tab each time.

They also need to catch up to the rest of the world and give the user a choice of which browser to open up by default on iOS. Oh, this is Apple though - they give you the absolute least amount of functionality that they can get away with while charging the highest prices. I can't wait for the time of Apple to come to an end.
A counterpoint.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/08/unlearning-t...
"Fundamentally it is software that works like the brain". I stopped reading there, no good thing can be in any document that contains this phrase*

* Apart from this one
"We can beat the market"... Those are bold words.
"Uncertified divers escorted by an experienced, certified diver / instructor and after a safety and equipment briefing."

You probably meant "divers with a basic SCUBA certification" (open water, ~30ft depth and conditions similar to your previous dives)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11697/the-amd-ryzen-threadripp...

23.11 compiles per day vs 15.6 for the 1700. 50% faster.
start looking for a new job, the PC crowd will get your head...
... says a media outlet with live trackers for connect.facebook.com and graph.facebook.com, amoung others.
I have (had) a channel that had videos about missing people, their last sightings on CCTV etc. The parents of a missing person even used an embed video on their site of a CCTV footage. They emailed me if I still have the video because they need it.

YouTube banned the whole channel for extremist/hateful content. Probably some of the videos/titles told the AI that the footage is extreme or some sort of glorification.

I appealed on some form but don't even bother anymore.

I hope YouTube as a video platform (not streaming) gets a serious competitor.
I work with a couple people who insistently write shell scripts in Python. I know it's anecdotal, but to me, it's like the metaphor 'When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.' The scripts use functions liberally, but the code isn't DRY nor self-documented. Written in shell, it would take a fifth of the LOC because there's no need to use subprocess or Popen and parse the output. They're not the best developers, but I certainly trust their Python code than I would trust their shell code. And, there's plenty of work to go around, so it's better than nothing.
He could have dumped the body somewhere else and only sank the sub to wash away the evidence. The sub was missing for over 12 hours. Who knows how far that thing can get in that time.
I recommend reading an article about dude who was unable to code with his hands, so he uses voice commands to code faster than with keyboard[1].

[1]: http://ergoemacs.org/emacs/using_voice_to_code.html
To be fair, YouTube is under no obligation to some greater good; it's just a video hosting service. Expecting it to "preserve footage" and any footage at that, is a strange expectation.
> However, your reward for successfully armchair-lawyering that may be a full-on Federal lawsuit.

I assume Github has a whole bunch of non-armchair lawyers.

But this is indeed the problem with the whole system, it comes down to who can pay the legal bills.

It seems obvious to me that Easylist is neither "primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access", "has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent", nor "is marketed.. for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access."

But it could take a whole lot of legal fees to determine that in court, and as we saw in Oracle v Google, the courts don't always decide what seems obvious to us. For better or worse, any sane person or entity wants to stay out of court regardless of whether their lawyers think they have a great case. Unless they have a whole lot of money to burn.

At the least, I think Github should make it's policies clear about what it's doing. If they say a DMCA takedown notice must "Identify the copyrighted work you believe has been infringed" (as the law indeed says), they should not take action to complaints that don't do this. If they want to respond to other types of complaints, they should say so, and explain how. (And ask their lawyers how it effects their liability under DMCA, if at all).

Github appears to be trying for transparency with their docs and practices on DMCA, which is great and important and greatly appreciated. This is one area where it could be improved. Responding to DMCA takedown notices that are not in fact DMCA takedown notices and do not follow Github's own published instructions/requirements for DMCA takedown notices (cause they aren't DMCA takedown notices)... is not transparency. The DMCA regime has plusses and minuses; mis-educating people about the DMCA law doesn't help us evaluate what these may be in order to be engaged citizens.
Having just finished rereading 1984, I say the most compelling attribute was how normalized Big Brother was. His (?) omnipotence was gladly accepted, to the point of (next to) no one noticing. I would say that an accurate reflection of most people's perception of FB, Google, etc.
This looks great. Do you know the exact reason why ie10/11 is not supported?
I bought a baby, sure, still my baby. But please not say I gave birth to the baby. Fact is fact, period.
As I note in the Github for this project, that list is woefully incomplete.

See my analysis at the Anti-Adblock Killer repo for more detail -
https://github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer/pull/2502#issuec...

Admiral has thousands of domains across Google Cloud and AWS hosts.
It was folly to think that YouTube would be a safe place to document war crimes. YouTube is a distribution channel, not a preservation channel. Its ease of use certainly makes it an attractive option to upload things quickly, but anything of historical significance should have the video raws immediately turned over to a human rights organization for preservation.
You have listed all the reasons that make Android very valuable for Google. At the same time, do you believe Google can be as evil as Facebook? I personally believe it isn't and won't be (so it's just the lesser evil).

I wouldn't trust Facebook to not be evil, based on its poor track record on privacy and treating users badly as well as its highly ambitious and callous founder/CEO. I'm also sure that Facebook has been working on dismantling the Google ecosystem or bypassing it wherever possible to control and retain user attention.
Yep this is like coming up with a stock algorithm that says "every tech stock goes up on average 20% in the first week of September unless its an even year and the stock starts with the letter T"
One of the important properties of the stock market is that it is a chaotic system which changes based on observations people make of the system itself. This has fascinating implications.

To understand why this is important, compare the following: If everyone looks up at the sky and sees rainclouds, this does nothing to effect the likelihood of rain. The weather doesn't depend on what people think about it.

With the stock market things are different. If Tesla stock goes to $400, you might have a pool of people looking at charts, comparing Tesla's performance to it's 200 day moving average and deciding that this movement is "too quick" - so they start selling Tesla and thus change the stock's behavior. It is a self-reflective variety of chaos.

The same is true of stock analyst opinions: A publicly voiced opinion of a stock directly effects the stock because people look to analysts for guidance. If 20 analysts from important firms like Goldman Sachs appear on CNN / Bloomberg swearing that Tesla is an outrageous BUY stock, it will cause more people to buy the stock because analysts opinions effect the price behavior.

Long story short, what the author may actually be observing to some degree is that analyst opinions may CAUSE stock outperformance.
Why does a component need to belong to a system? Why can't the component belong to itself and just be used by multiple systems?
the statue of liberty would be a great investment if the government was planning to tear it down and sell it for scrap and you could buy it cheap before the word got out.
This would make a good Black Mirror episode.
Nvidia, render log in optional in order to use Nvidia Experience
> You can write something that passes acceptance tests in C++ without a lot of effort.

True for freshman-year

std::cout << "Hello, world!" << std::endl

programs maybe. People's heads asplode when they get into C++ with any sophistication because they need to grasp several things at once: classes, inheritance and polymorphism, pointers (smart or not), value vs. reference types, etc. Java, JavaScript, and even Lisp go a long way toward hiding those details from the programmer.
Youtube's response regarding one of these videos documenting abuses (emphasis mine):

> "we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision. We appreciate your understanding."

Can someone explain to me why corporations, when interacting with customers regarding complaints/appeals, seem to have "don't forget to add insult to injury" as one of their motto more often than not? Does that kind of patronizing tone sound polite to the ears of a PR drone?
How to Make 100 Usable Images of Record Covers in 1 Hour
It is much harder to do functional programming in an OOP language, as one is often fighting the syntax, semantics and various defaults. For example all variables are typically by default mutable, null in every type, libraries and frameworks with pervasive mutable state etc.

Granted it has been getting easier as OOP languages have been slowly getting more and more functional features. But it really is easier to favour immutability and composition in a functional-first language.
Hmm, I have a different understanding of "costs nothing" and what is "easy" in this context.

It would've been a lot of work for HR to deal with this internally.

As it is, it is also a lot of work for them to deal with anyway.

In the long run, it's anyone's guess. Companies set and enforce their values how they please.
An organiziation should not be free of criticism simply because it does not have an obligation to do or not do something.
Founder of MarketBeat (website mentioned) here. We do have more than two years of data (more like 7), but profile pages get too large when we publish it all in one shot. We can make the full history available as a giant CSV file if there's a researcher that wants to do a similar analysis over a long period of time.
CVS Health Reports Second Quarter Results – CVS Health
I don't think what you're saying is really much at odds with many OOP languages. Unless I'm missing something, Ruby's mixins and duck-typing (care about what messages an object responds to rather than it's type) comes awfully close to what you're looking for.

Granted, something like duck-typing is more of a practice or pattern than something that's terribly well supported by the language (it's up to you to put safeguards that the object being passed to you does what you want it to do), but it's certainly possible and describes most well-written Ruby code.
That may be great as a parallel project, but the point of this one is to take head on legally any challenges. At least that's my reading of his explanation.

He's blazing a trail that others who may be more risk averse or have more to lose can then follow. Actually blocking these domains is kind of a side benefit, especially since the most likely people to download the extension are those who could just as easily achieve the end result themselves in other ways.

Unfortunately there is no legal concept of waiver in this situation: the other side can pick and choose weak targets at will and avoid someone who will fight back. Just one more critical flaw in the DMCA system. Contrast this with trademark law where one must universally enforce the mark or risk losing it entirely.
Not an obligation, but their mission statement is
"To organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful."

Guess they need to change to "information that we and our advertisers agree with."

Yes, I know they are different companies under Alphabet but it doesn't matter. Google has become a monster and too big, powerful.