skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's no need to be like that.

> Is there some reason programmers feel this need to bring up workarounds when I'm looking for an actual solution?

It is a solution! It's not the same solution you want, but it's an actual solution to the problem you described.

> Address the point the person you're responding to is making, and answer only the questions they are asking.

They are addressing the point, and " answer only the questions they are asking." is a dreadful idea to me. So often people are asking how to solve a problem in a specific way, but there's no good reason to be limiting themselves in that way. Given that they currently can't easily solve their problem in that specific way, it suggests that if there is a nice solution they are likely looking in the wrong place.

> Making assumptions just wastes people's time.

I feel like not sharing a solution because you think that the person you're trying to help has some unexpected extra

> is how I always read these types of responses in my head, and it's really frustrating because often-times I'm already aware of whatever workaround you've mentioned, have already tried it, and know it's not suitable. It's doubly frustrating when you're specifically looking for the solution that's not the workaround.

Then you should make it more explicit what you've already tried. We're not inside your head, and many people haven't tried these things before. This is a good guide: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

I didn't realise lambda@edge was a thing, or that I could use it to solve these problems. If I'd asked the question, these would have helped me. Why should someone refrain from writing a concise and polite response helping me purely because they think I may have tried that before and it will annoy me?

> "You should be doing this you pleb!" is how I always read these types of responses in my head,

Then you may benefit from trying to work on this. Their reply has none of this snark or rudeness at all, and is simply listing some ways of solving the problem. You are the one that added this mentally, and then it annoys you. You are adding something yourself which then annoys you.

Go back and read what they said. They very simply explained that AWS let you do those things using lambda@edge. There was absolutely no reason to reply so rudely.
John Baez has a bit of a discussion here:

https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2017/08/15/norbert-blum...
It's possible to do this with just your home oven, green beans, a tray and a timer.
It's something that is being done to you.

It's nice if that works for you but for me it totally doesn't. I have once also tried to teach myself to think that way, but in the end figured out I'd just be lying to myself by trying to come up with an alternate formulation of a problem which makes it sounds less of a problem but in reality doesn't help as it does not find a solution.

For example me being depressed is just me, no way around it. Physically speaking it's probably the non-depressed version but with some altered chemical levels causing the brain areas where it originates to be more actuated than the rest. But it's still the same body, still the same mind, just an altered state. I found embracing that and reflecting on it works better than the 'it's being done to me' thought because the latter, to me, implies there's a cause to be found and to be cured. I'm an engineer, after all. Finding the cause of depression I wasted years of thinking on already, let alone curing it. It doesn't work. So better deal with it. Which is basically what Stoicism teaches us, btw.
Is it really though. Typically programmers do not interact directly other than with other of their kind (yes I used the tribalism adjective). software architects and testers neither.

This opposed to analysts, marketing who directly engage with clients and management who interact with their own group as well as at least people they manage.
> What if you were mugged?

Walking down a dark alley, alone, at night and not having a sense of situational awareness. I was nearly mugged because of that, and now have a much greater sense of situational awareness.

I know, I know, blaming the victim is bad, but sometimes clearly assessing what led you to be in a certain type of situation can help you avoid those types of situations in the future.
Most electric car charging can (and is) be done slowly and steadily. Cars with big batteries -- Bolts and Teslas -- can go several days of typical driving without recharging, then charge overnight.
Cliff Spohn's Art of Apple
I don't get it. In what scenarios would this be useful?
It's not a great idea to regularly consume large quantities of what is essentially a natural insecticide. If you're tired, it's a much better idea to have a nap for 20 mins. Wish that was more socially acceptable
LinkedIn told it cannot stop the bots
For synthesis, you don't need to know the exact pathway, but phosphorylation is very awkward synthetically, so you do need the enzyme for that (usually doesn't have to be the exact one, though). Synthetic psilocin is already a thing, it's just not sold because it's illegal and rapidly oxidized by air. Understanding the biosynthesis of stuff is more of a gateway to messing with it where it is or transplanting it into bacteria (which can be cheaper than synthesis).
What could possibly convince you?

We have a pretty well respected company saying "this is what we found", before anyone knew how important it would end up being.

The links you have posted appear to be a fairly random set of unrelated things that I guess are supposed to undermine the report, but to me they look.. unrelated?

The OpenSecret links aren't for CrowdStrike.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000801 is for Warburg Pincus and shows are very even mix of Republican and Democratic recipients.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000031277 is for Accel Partners, and again shows an even spread, with the exception of a $176,580 donation to Right To Rise USA which is a Jeb Bush SuperPac.

The rest seem.. I don't even know what to say about them. https://i.imgur.com/O9z33Dq.png is just a ToC of report??
People often don't have a dryer in the garage, but it's common enough that they'll have the plug there anyway.
Somewhat similar to some problems I used to have with sleeping. If I was particularly stressed and had trouble getting to sleep a couple of days in a row. Then I would be stressed, tired because of lack of sleep and now starting to stress about not being able to get to sleep leading me to find it even harder to sleep.
Yes, you're right the cladding is lower index, and it is a controlled index! It (along with other layers) protects the inner core. Most data transport fiber is single mode, which requires very tight control of the ~8um 'diameter' of the high index core, but allows for lower loss/km and you don't get mixing of the different modes (think of them as different reflective angles for simplicity). If air was used then any scratch or dirt contacting the core would couple light out.

In fact most multi-mode is graded index and it's much easier to get light into (8x larger core) without a specialized coupler. Note that even single mode allows DWDM- many different high-bandwidth wavelengths, but only 40nm spacing on 1560nm IR. The core, cladding, and outer protective layers are extruded and pulled to extremely precise dimensions, dispersions, and densities into multi-km rolls.

The games that are played to equalize loss and delay among the wavelengths over a range of power and temperature is crazy... and that's ignoring the EDFA optically pumped fiber amplifiers, which let under sea cables work. Amazing tech!
Age Discrimination: The Hows and the Whys
Hobbyists have had FPV in RC planes and helis for 10+ years, but it's easy now so everyone is doing it. You don't need to know how to solder, program transmitters, cobble together TX/RX equipment, have a ham license, etc etc etc. There wasn't a problem before, because the types of people who would cause problems and do stupid stuff didn't generally have the patience / skills to get it working to the point that they could actually do damage with it. It's cool that this is a more accessible hobby now, but kids being kids without the adult supervision that would have come with affording, designing, acquiring, assembling, and flying + operating such a device is gone with cheap drones + the internet.

I think that regulating it will be bad for hobbyists. Drones are already banned in national parks and some city / county parks (shame since there's an entire category of "park flyers" and few AMA RC flying fields in the Bay Area). I've given up on RC flight for now, but drone racing in warehouses and parks seems insanely fun.
And that is in tech in general, not even the best of it which is a tiny slice of a already small pie. (And Google aspires to be.)

I'd course it might make sense to have an ineffective programme just for PR reasons. If they can afford it.
Many people are concerned about jobs, healthcare, and security but only fucking nazis and other white supremacist pieces of shit are concerned about "the uncertainty of demographic shifts (especially the shrinking proportion of their own race, and the growing relevance of race in public discourse)." That's not a normal concern and choosing to become a white supremacist because you have such concerns is no excuse for these lowlifes. These people choose hate and no amount of apologizing for their disgusting choices is ever going to make that ok. They could choose to talk to other people who are different than them and realize that good people come in all colors, nationalities, etc. But no, they choose hate and they choose violence. Fuck them. We've had hundreds of years of this shit all over the world but especially in the U.S. and finally people are standing up to this shit en masse and refusing to accept it. It's about fucking time to stop being tolerant of these hateful, violent fucks. Society is slowly moving on.
I know this, but you can still use Bitfinex by depositing crypto and using a VPN. Not really "illegal".

Gemini is great, but they are slow to verify and as you stated very limited on your trading pairs.
Written a few songs. This article is good advice and it captures the process really well. It honors the sporadic nature of idea generation. #2 is incredibly true, just capture them, even if you're driving on a highway! You'll never get the moment back...

#3 and #4 are novel. I'm glad I've learned about them now.

#5 and #8 is a matter of schools of thought. I don't agree. And perhaps because I've written 10 verses drivelling about love. :) I think that if the 10 verses are adequately compelling, through construction and message, then it can lock in a listener. Pandering only to what works in hits is limiting, in my view.

#6, #9, and #10 is also evidence of a mature songwriter. H/t.
no-calorie tonic? Hmmm.
> So why don't we use BSD everywhere, or Linux everywhere? There's no single reason -- it's many reasons -- and it's serious engineering time to document them all and do the topic justice. I'd like to, but I don't have that time right now.

If you ever have the time, that would be an awesome read. I find the differences between operating systems fascinating, and rarely done justice as people overlook the subtleties for a "Just use <<insert favourite tribe>>" approach.
What in that video suggests that TruePundit's sources were real? Cenk not only falls for the story, he makes up another conspiracy theory out of whole cloth by saying that "non-legal methods" in a Clinton email means illegal instead of methods that don't use the courts.

This is supposed to be convincing? Here's more of TruePundit's vaunted anonymous sources saying things you and Assange might be credulous enough to believe: https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/2/1590342/--True-Pund....
To be fair, you might be a little bit biased ;)
It is faster that Bitcoin (~2.5min avg block time vs ~10min), has a vibrant community, and still very secure. Easier entry price, and you can spend $5 without a $3 fee, or any fee at all.

It also already has SegWit and has for months.
Unless state is replace by message handling

https://github.com/EOSIO/Documentation/blob/master/Technical...
I'm saying that the whole concept of spheres of influence is outdated, immoral and invalid. Instead, you should think in terms of alliances or some other concept that gives agency to the people there, not "the West" or Russia.

The sovereign countries themselves must get a choice - if they want to join NATO, that is their right, and Russia shouldn't get a veto (nor even a vote) in that. Countries should be free to join/leave the "spheres" at will, not be placed there or given or taken.

And, actually, the whole reason why NATO is at their borders is the Russian insistence of their sphere of influence. If Russia agreed in practice that their borders stop where they are and that they won't ever poke beyond them, then their neigbours wouldn't need to even consider NATO.
I think you are spot on Brendan. We use both Linux and FreeBSD, and we see that applications can behave very differently in some scenarios on both platforms.
So basically it's a student loan with a friendly debt collection policy?
Doolio BETA – Create free account today
>Nevertheless, this is not the stuff that helps create the

>kind of deeper - vulnerable - connections that are stressed

>in the article.

No probably not. That would be really surprising also. I can really imagine this guy who wrote it, an ancient American business man - he's surely not into that kind of stuff. Anyways, it's a start ;)
Sort of. You can implement a KYC layer on too of Bitcoin, and have government-sanctioned "clean" versus illegal "tainted" coins.
I understood it as he compared last modified of two files that were downloaded consecutively. Now if you take the difference between those last modified dates that would be the time spent downloading one of these files (which one is up to which date was greater). That is assuming that files were being copied synchronously one by one (like cp would do)
I only know two languages, my native English (south west England) plus Norwegian (fairly fluent but terrible accent and massive gaps in vocabulary).

When I am in the company of people who don't have English as their first language, or perhaps don't speak English at all, I sometimes have an almost irresistible urge to speak Norwegian to them. It's as though my brain does something like: they speak a foreign language, Norwegian is a foreign language, so Norwegian will do.
A cheap (<$100) step up from that is a hot air popcorn popper, and the sky is the limit. Check out http://drinks.seriouseats.com/2013/12/why-you-shouldnt-roast... for a quick overview of what you're getting into and some recommended further reading. TL;DR it's not really worth it but can be a fun hobby which can yield good results with practice.
That link is giving me a 403 Access forbidden error.
> It's hard to deny that women vote against capitalists more often.

> Why is it wrong to speak the truth?

One could argue that some degree of voting against extreme capitalists has allowed capitalism to endure.

Women got the vote 100 years ago, and America still has the dominant marketplace in the world.

Capitalism has expanded across the world since that time. Even China has largely embraced capitalism.

Nothing is wrong with speaking either a truth or a theory.

However, what you put forward isn't based on any research and sounds more like a stereotype, or your personal experience, than an objective truth backed by science.

In those cases, there can be more than meets the eye.
Verifying a proof-of-work has to at least be quicker than computing the proof-of-work. Verifying and computing can't be literally the same operation. That's not a proof-of-work.

>Like if 500 people can independently confirm a build produces a binary with result X then they could all share in the reward, whatever that is.

In a cryptocurrency blockchain, every single node verifies every block received from another node in order to check whether it should be included in the node's local copy of the blockchain. If computing and verifying are the same operation, it's not "500 people independently verify a source produces a given binary and the rest of the network rewards them", but "the entire network verifies that a source produces a given binary and they all equally pat each other on the back". Unless you only reward the first to verify a build, but then no node would bother spending time verifying blocks made by other people and building off that chain rather than mining its own blocks if they both take as long as each other.

>The problem is in verifying that someone actually did the work and didn't steal someone else's solution.

Bitcoin uses the hash of the rest of the block (which includes the address for the reward of the miner who is doing the proof-of-work) as an input into the proof-of-work such that the result of the proof-of-work is only valid for that input. It's not apparent to me whether where there could be room to add an input like that into checking whether a source compiles to a binary. (I thought through whether you could make a Lamport-signature-like scheme involving picking specific intermediate values generated during the compilation that correspond to parts from a pre-committed series of hash pairs, but then I realized it wouldn't work because anyone who does the build once would get all of the intermediate values and be able to create as many of these signatures as they wanted for little effort.)

>Maybe encrypting the result you get and sending it off in escrow to a centralized verification location would work, and once a sufficient number of solutions are collected the solutions are unsealed and the results shared so everyone can see what happened and raise any objections.

Sounds like what you're looking for is some kind of web-of-trust reputation system with a trusted authority rather than a cryptocurrency blockchain. (If you have a trusted authority, then nearly all of the design of a bitcoin-like cryptocurrency is ridiculous dead weight. You can shed nearly everything, you don't need a broadcast-everything blockchain, and you could choose to have really cool things like blind signatures for anonymous transactions.) (Though if you have a trusted authority who can afford to be running build processes, it'd be a lot simpler to just have them do all the build-verifying for you, and you could do away with anything discussed in this post and just have them publish a PGP/HTTPS-encrypted webpage with their results.)
Thanks! Bought a new breed of mulberry for next year - https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/feb/19/remarka...

I managed to find a supplier for pawpaw but not sure it will fruit in this climate
Germany doesn't have that, and will never have that? Quite a prediction. In the US, most apartments don't have chargers, but they're starting to install them. And where I live, new construction is required to have chargers in the garage.
I'd argue if the data is being made publicly available (particularly in the case of LinkedIn where we are choosing to make our own data publicly available), it is being made publicly available, and anyone should be able to take and use that data. Our data shouldn't be what a corporation's profit (or loss of profit) is based on to begin with.
We use zfsonlinux in production already. Have for years. It's had some issues, some have been fixed, some not yet. (I'm usually the go-to person to deal with the deepest ZFS issues.) Last I load tested FreeBSD ZFS it wasn't much different: a different set of issues. Some problems, some fixes.

We're now using btrfs too.

What's your technical beef with ZFS on Linux anyway?
So, as a motive, one possibility could be the DNC orchestrated the DNC leaks to blunt the effect of trickling podesta/wikileaks emails if it was somehow an insider. Why become the news during a campaign where every moment Trump spoke his poll numbers went down? And show their own favoritism? It doesn't seem plausible. This could all be more Russian disinformation. As far as the podesta/wikileaks emails go:

1) Russia's history when it comes to election meddling and spreading dis-information speaks for itself, yes the US does it too, but the Russia is on another level (Every eastern European country has been a public target from the same groups).

2) Russia had a lot more to fear from Hillary than Trump. The sanctions and military ratcheting would likely be more in force than it is now under Trump and a dysfunctional congress. Hillary was a known hawk on Russia, compared with Manafort/Flynn on Russia.

3) Putin himself said "some patriotic Russians might have done stuff" like sending phishing emails.

When Russia faced the lemon of a Hillary administration, they made lemonade. Arguably, it wasn't that hard and paid for itself. We as the voting public knew most of this before the election, including partly about Trump's intent of collusion and possibly collusion, and voted the way we did anyway.

Assange is kind of irrelevant, he has always had his own motives, and it's pretty clearly being anti-US. Offering Damore a job with wikileaks, really?
What makes you think software developers write the same average amount of lines of code per day ? It seems to me the higher level the language is, higher is the average number of loc per day. IHMO Debugging has an huge impact on this average and lower level languages are harder to debug.
You could have a system that does that. I'm just saying that it's not a proof-of-work and wouldn't work as the foundation of a decentralized cryptocurrency blockchain. The system that does what you say couldn't be a cryptocurrency blockchain.
>What I cannot understand is how such a system could reasonably be enforced.

That would be a 26 billion dollar question, and one I would very much love to solve one day! :)

I believe that your example is fairly simplistic to capture the crux of the issue here. The metadata associated with posts often contain features that are quite revealing, but not necessarily the kind of data that the source would wish to be revealed. E.g. I have noticed multiple times that the number of cold emails I have received from recruiters is higher immediately after I update my LinkedIn profile, leading me to believe that the last-update timestamp is a feature that the LinkedIn search engine may be relying on to rank results. While my evidence is purely empirical, it isn't a stretch to imagine that it would be a reasonable thing to do, given that most users normally update their profiles when they are about to start searching for new opportunities.

On the one hand, this is a an excellent product that allows recruiters to reach targets that exhibit behavior associated with active job-seekers, resulting in better connections. It results in a win-win situation where the recruiter gets a pretty good return on his/her investment, and the target receives the attention/information they were looking for with their update. False positives in this situation result in a few unsolicited emails/unwanted attention.

On the flip side, this information can be repackaged to present a manager with a graph plotting the probability of an employee quitting. While this is a perfectly good product, no employee would every use a service that might reveal their future plans ahead of a time of their own choosing. Furthermore, false positives here can have a significant impact and LinkedIn may not remain in business for long if word of this product gets out.
This is a real issue. It is very depressing to find out that only thing I have ever done is two pieces of paper in 1970s. National Archives (of Finland) do not recognize any other form of publications than those on paper. In this case very shitty paper "printed" about 10 times with a Xerox-machine.
The rules depend on whether something is copyrightable or not.

Movies are copyrightable.

Compiled catalogs of personal information are not (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._R...).
KDE Plasma has support for redshift as well.