skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
More of a barrier; I'm an FT subscriber, and having tried to click through on the original link am not able to read this story (my "free page count" has been reached - I assume by other HN readers - but as a premium subscriber I should have no such limit). All other pages work fine.

I guess that's a few quid I won't be spending from next month onwards...
3. If I do save, it will all be taxed off me to pay for those who didn't.

Here in the UK, the last government started levying a tax on the pension funds, and the present government hasn't revoked it. So people who have guaranteed pensions paid for by the taxpayer, out of tax revenues, are doing so off the backs of those in the private sector who save for their retirement. It disgusts me.
"He" is a common vernacular; get off your soapbox.
where to?
Does the information you learn while using provigil "stick"? I.e. are you able to recall it later as well as information learned while not on it? Are you able to integrate it into your preexisting conceptual corpus for that subject?

Your description of the effects on how you perceive poker games was very nice. Can you give a similar analysis of the effects on memory and the learning process?
Its A Latest Japan Cell Phone
Short version of this blog entry: I heard someone say somewhere once that it seemed to lower their creativity and it totally makes sense doesn't it!!!!
Nothing you couldn't do in assembly. Just easier and more elegant.
Steve Reich is rhythmic, repetitive, and very cool. Highly recommended.
I've never understood the animosity towards overloading `they` as a neuter singular pronoun. It doesn't seem to introduce any sort of ambiguity in the language and replaces a whole slurry of fumbling and hackish attempts with a single widely understood syllable. It's damned convenient.

Of course, I also hold a disdain for "proper quoting".
"I'm partial to keeping 3 months of expenses in cash and another 9 months in highly liquid, low volatility securities."

I'm curious...what highly liquid, low volatility securities are you in right now? The best I've been able to do is a high-yield online savings account, but I'd love to know if there's something better.
Nuclear fusion – what is it worth?
Anybody else think of the book Godel Escher Bach when they were watching this movie? Beautiful how the movie wraps in on itself like a mobius strip.
I've learned not to take things at face value and provide evidence (and demand evidence) of why what's said makes sense, is credible, etc. People here are always calling others out for what amounts to "anecdotal evidence" and I know find myself doing that IRL much to the dismay of some people--coworkers, for example--who like to put forth flimsy ideas and evidence of different things as gospel. The average person doesn't ask questions (or just doesn't care as much), but I've learned from being here not to be like that. I imagine it's pissed some people off that I know, but it keeps misinformation down and thus, everybody benefits.
Hi niekmass,

You are absolutely correct. The goal of your investigation does in fact dictate if you should use percentages or absolute numbers. Likewise, 298 million Chinese Internet users is nothing to sneeze at!
Top news get stale quickly. What did you expect?
actually there was multi-threading, using sort of kick-based synchronisation primitive

I think they actually used an actor-based threading model.
There has yet to be a real study of such things, but...
there is info like this out there

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1702897/posts

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18725095.600

if too much water on the skin causes horrible burns I do not want to think about what would happen to the water in contacts or even in your eyes.
All these clever plans fall apart when everyone does them.

What are the barriers to entry to working part time in a grocery store? What makes you think you can compete with a teenager who wants that job?
Erdos took amphetamines (speed, Adderall, etc), not methamphetamines. They are related drugs, but meth is much stronger and dangerous.
Sure, in America there are at least three independent lines of evidence for the 10x figures. DOJ arrest rates, DOJ violent crime victim surveys, and simply by looking at the race of murder victims (50% are black -- most murder in the US seems to be intraracial).

Globally, you can look here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/oct/13/homicide...

The numbers in Africa look bad, but South Africa is really the only place in Africa together enough to do statistics on this stuff. Of course, they also have the highest murder rate in the world (one assumes that other parts would have them beat handily if they could count it all). Jamaica also tops the list in our Hemisphere. The rate cited there for Haiti is half as high as I've seen it elsewhere, but Haiti isn't a great place for accurate data collection, of course.

I've got some estimates for crime rates of African populations in places where they are severe minorities (there's a figure on the internet that claim 80% of London gun crime is African/Caribbean), but it's really hard to be very exact about this sort of thing.

It's a mess of numbers, but there just doesn't seem to be much room for the case that America's problems are special (Brazil, for example, has somewhat similar population demographics, and broadly similar problems).
It's one thing to use psychoactive drugs on occasion if you're eating healthfully, exercising, getting enough sleep, in good mental health, and using only one drug at a time. I can't even imagine what mixing weed and amphetamines on a daily basis would do to a person. That sounds like a terrible, terrible idea.

As soon as drug use becomes banal you are really asking for trouble.
I assume there are workarounds to get some amount of data for free, but the fact is, if you want high volumes of professionally-gathered data, you pay the people who do that for a living.

Give Dun and Bradstreet a call, or use their web interface (ZapData.com). There are huge amounts of criteria you can search on; industry, employee size, and the like are two of many.
Most people on HN belong to another ~10x crime group: Americans, all those bombs and guns blowing up stuff all over the world to 'protect' capitalism...50% of American's taxes makes us individually responsible
you only know the mean is good enough if you examine the spread and/or use a robust estimator.

spikes happen in performance (for better and for worse) all the time. one spike is enough to totally distort the mean, no matter how often you repeat.

it might be a microbenchmark but to paraphrase: if it's not done well, it's not worth doing. the complete opposite of what the microbenchmark purports to show could be true most of the time.
Okay, it takes effort to make me suspend my rule against politics on HN, but I have my limits. If you are some kind of troll, I nominate you for an Academy Award.

First: Social security is solvent, it will be solvent for years, and to fix it will require a minor tax increase decades from now. Quit believing propaganda.

Second: Our future budgetary problems are nonetheless real. But they are all about health care. If you really want to worry about balancing budgets in 2040, worry about that. Social Security is fine and will continue to be fine unless somebody deliberately fucks it up. (By talking like a fatalist, as you do, you inadvertently help the cause of the people who are trying to fuck it up; that is why we are having this little chat.)

Third: The major problem in the USA today is that we have a massive excess of productive capacity. Not only can the country afford to feed, clothe, house, and entertain you quite nicely, but our biggest problem is that after we did this we might still have too much capacity. The economy is not well designed for such a situation, and it needs fixing.

(Aside: The fix is called "stimulus", literally known as "printing money". People won't spend money? Make them spend it now. Create new money and give it away; make the old money move by threatening to inflate it away in the future. That nobody in power understands this, or that they pretend not to, is an epic failure of education and/or governance; the consequence will be millions of impoverishments and, likely, early deaths, perhaps even your own. Tragedy sucks.)

To the extent that the country does not choose to feed, clothe, house, and entertain you and everyone around you, it is a problem of government, economics, and politics. It is not that we are physically incapable. It is that we are not so organized.

The solution is to organize.

Where will "the money" come from? Money is not a physical thing, like platinum. It's some numbers in a spreadsheet by which we keep score: If your number is higher, you get to control more about what the economy does.

If you wake up and discover that all the money belongs to a handful of people who have gamed the ruleset by which money is distributed, and that they are failing to use their giant pile of money to direct the economy to keep everyone else fed, clothed, housed, and entertained to the correct extent: You change the rules, or you stop playing the game.

By many orders of magnitude, the best option is to change the rules. Or, rather, to change one rule, to turn one knob that was designed to be turned: Raise taxes on the people with the money.

That anyone contemplates suicide rather than go down fighting for this simple rule change is a triumph of modern propaganda.

Get up out of the fetal position and be an American, for the love of all that is holy.
I don't think it is accurate to say women (or anyone who is touchy-feely) are more backstabbing. I do think it is accurate to say that touchy-feely types are generally inclined to be less direct (what you characterized as "deceitful") in the face of something socially unpleasant -- they seem to expect others to read between the lines, infer and so on. When such subtleties fail, they often don't deal well with the ugliness which ensues. Having written my above paragraph, it occurred to me that although I am a conflict-avoider and will go out of my way to avoid fighting with people, I seem more comfortable with direct confrontation than most women and that is probably one of the things that makes many people uncomfortable with me. People find me "combative" although I really don't like to fight with people. But if there is an issue, I generally prefer to be direct and prefer people being direct with me -- assuming there is no malice on both sides. Where there is real malice, best to know when to shut up.

FWIW: My experience has been that extremely suave, charming men are typically also untrustworthy. They generally know how to manipulate people and usually don't hesitate to do so. Of course, people who are both charming and have a strong sense of integrity make wonderful company. But if I have to choose one or the other, I prefer integrity to charm.

Perhaps you are intending "touchy-feely" to mean non-genuine?

No, but I think there is some correlation between the two things. People who want very much to make nice are inclined to tell "little white lies", which puts one on a slippery slope. I wish my experiences indicated otherwise.

I hope that is clearer.

Thanks.
I used to work in financial software and very much disagree with aspiringsensei's advice. There's a huge adverse selection problem with financial advisors: the ones who are any good at managing money can make far more at Goldman Sachs, which tends to leave the people who don't really understand what they're doing advising the retail investors. The advice my sister got when she talked to a "good" (recommended by her employer) financial advisor was atrocious: it was based mostly on the theory that large dividend-paying companies never go out of business, which seems rather ironic considering he worked for Merrill Lynch, a large dividend-paying company that nobody would imagine would go out of business, and yet...went out of business in 2008.

I'd start by educating yourself on the mechanics of the market. Read A Random Walk Down Wall Street, read Benjamin Graham, read Warren Buffett. Learn to read an income statement and a balance sheet, and look at some historical stocks with income and assets in mind. Figure out how you would manage your money if you had infinite time. Then if you want, hire a financial advisor that manages money the same way you would, except has the time that you don't to actually investigate companies and keep an eye on their financial performance.

Also, keep in mind that an index fund is effectively free financial advice (that you always follow) from every market participant. Essentially, you're saying "I don't have time to make my own investment decisions, so I'm going look at the average of what everyone else is doing, and do that." That average will include everything from Goldman Sachs money managers and Warren Buffett down to retail investors and financial advisors. It's capitalization-weighted though, so the people with the most money's "votes" count the most, which is usually what you want.
suppose everyone did the exact opposite. they saved like crazy and only spent enough to survive.

then the economy collapses for lack of consumption, no!?

something seems deeply wrong here.
Thank you, yes it is!
Case of exaggeration for comedic effect.
This is how you pitch a new piece of technology. 
Here is another motivational thread on HN:
Ask HN: Movies that motivate you?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1349566

I just watched the first episode of Mad Men and I'm hooked.
Am I wrong in thinking that this is a completely industry-standard setup for RF testing? Many of the passages make it seem that Apple is going above and beyond the call of duty in their testing (like the heads filled with solution approximating tissue), but it seems to me like these are essentially minimal due-diligence procedure mandated by the FTC. Hell, I'm pretty sure some of the (severely underfunded) labs back at my university had similar equipment.

Can anyone more familiar with the industry comment on what sort of facilities other vendors use?
I always felt that the quote indicated that statistics are easily used to mislead with credibility. When I homeschooled my sons, I gave them a choice between the algebra/geometry/calc track and a statistics track. They chose statistics. An interesting book we included in our studies was "How to lie with statistics". (FWIW: I think there was a later book called something like "How to lie with charts and graphs".)

My point was not that statistics are lies but just that the statement "Graphs don't lie" isn't some kind of unquestionable grand truth.
"Speak Only When You Have Something New To Add"

A better rule IMHO is "Don't talk unless you're selling something."

That is, don't talk unless you're trying to change someone.
Most people just split it evenly, even if your burger cost more or whatever the situation. This is the norm in Boston, not sure about other places.
Boredoms (especially Super Roots 9)

Fuck Buttons (especially Tarot Sport)

Hella

Giraffes? Giraffes!

Lightning Bolt

I used to listen to digitally imported but now I find most of the stuff they play (even on the psytracne/goa station) annoyingly repetitive.
Gotta be better than shooting holes in people.
Thus defeating the FT's own pay wall...
Someone should make a hacker's manual of style.
Never before in the history of humanity have governments been able to effectively control each person in a large population so effectively as today

Compared to, say, ancient Egypt?
I'll add to this list :

- The Red Sparowes (their first 2 albums)

- The Redneck Manifesto
This actually works wonderfully if he buys up a lot of property. When everybody moves in and brings their money with them, land values shoot through the roof, and the people who owned that land make out like bandits. Folks who owned small orchards in Silicon Valley in the 1950s made out like bandits (assuming they managed it well), as did people who bought humble ranch-houses in the Boston suburbs in 50s and 60s.

He could be the Astor of Curaçao!
As long as it's only used in circumstances where shooting holes in people is the alternative, yes.
I bet most of the outraged commenters went right back to playing Call Of Duty 2: Modern Warfare after that.
Even if you don't think it's likely to be used against US citizens, I imagine the Chinese Government is not far behind in the development of this sort of technology.
Couldn't the sugar pill be dosed with something to reproduce that effect?
Pandora is no longer playing in Canada, it is such a nice service. Much cleaner and more pleasant to use than the alternatives like Deezer.
The military have a huge issue at checkpoints, if you ask a driver to stop and he doesn't, then you can't take the risk he didn't understand; he could be a suicide bomber. So they open fire. This provides a means to say, in any language, stop. So it will save lives.
"A decent micropayments model" is quite the line-item requirement. Nobody's built one yet, and we've been trying for 15 years.
There are more poor people in eight states of India than in the 26 countries of sub-Saharan Africa

That doesn't say anything about the poverty rate.

When the vast central Indian Madhya Pradesh state, which has a population of 70 million, was compared with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the war-racked African state of 62 million inhabitants, the two were found to have near-identical levels of poverty.

So that means certain parts of India have equal or greater levels of poverty than certain parts of Africa. But the poverty rate as a whole is lower.
Could you give an example? I'm curious, because I've never found any difficulties subclassing in a class-based language.

What extra does prototype-based subclassing give me?
That's because half-decent dev shop thought that they're full of good developers and their best developers managed to convince the management that measurement and metrics suck, just because software development is different!

Really, we need some kind of measurements or metrics. Otherwise, how else do we know we're progressing or improving or at least not sucking more.

I agree that metrics is hard to do and easy to game. That's why don't put a specific number or targets. And also don't tight metrics with employee performance. Put it on team's performance (still not perfect, but I'm sure it's better).

One example of metric that probably might have made sense is that if your shop is doing Agile (code review, code coverage, unit-test, # of bugs etc.) is to make sure that these numbers don't go down in every iteration. Make sure these numbers either stay the same or go up (in the case of improvements or new development). If the numbers go down for 2 consecutive iteration, someone or some team doesn't care about quality. Track improvements, not specific number.

Side note: I would suggest people to read Standish Group Chaos Report to understand how bad our industry was and how far have we improved over the years.
Here is another motivational thread on HN:
Ask HN: Movies that motivate you?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1349566

I just watched the first episode of Mad Men and I'm hooked.
And I would say that the problem is with viewing them primarily through the lens of their economic value to begin with, which puts them in the position you describe. That is a big part of why programs designed by the American government to help the poor typically get such dreadful results.
I always thought Park Place was always one of _why's hidden gems (no pun intended… except for now that I've pointed it out, I suppose that was intended).

Boardwalk is a fantastic name for the project.
Venture Capital Could Shrivel Away
Gotcha. I'm not a mathematician, but your comment made me feel like I'm running out of time to make a difference, and I'm only 24. It also gave me a bit of confidence that I can. Anyway, better get to it!
I would look at http://custdev.com to see how they did it. I bought their PDF.

That said I am interested in a good solution to this too.
Withdrawal options are interesting. I always get conflicting information (from financial advisors no less!) about the options for early withdrawal from a Roth IRA. I think I'm finally comfortable (after confirming specifically with my Roth IRA provider) saying that you can withdrawal from your Roth IRA as long as it's only capital invested, and not money earned on that investment.

As spammy of a title as it is, Ramit Sethi's "I will Teach you to be Rich" book is a great no-bullshit look at understanding your personal finances.
An Interview with Bill Gates (1996)
If anything's disturbing, it's that it's on a gadget-site, usually devoted to cellphones, gaming consoles and other consumer playthings.
Thanks for the pointer. I'm just now giving her music a listen and quite like it.
http://like.fm/chris is what I listen too. Auto play is coming soon.

And yea background music keeps me focused.
Because of i386. i386 has not enough registers to be able to efficiently divide them into pointer-only and non-pointer-only. For stack case it is often worthwhile to use calling convention reasonably similar to what C/OS uses, but examining that mess is not practical for GC, so it's better to just scan stack conservatively (which is by the way done by many other generational GCs).

Edit: also you can implement conservative scan of stack and registers on Unix without writing single line of assembly code by scanning result of getcontext(), or even almost completely portably by scanning result of setjmp() + some heuristics for finding stack in memory.
The "Tinker toy" reference was with respect to anonymouse delegates:

var thing () => {//code}

I think Anders is going to run out of symbols soon :).

The code you write here is fine - but you're tying Artist to the ParseKey method - which is the point of doing the block in the first place (to free that up). This might not look obtuse to you - but it's a lot more code than I have :).

Also - please don't forget the tie-in with method_missing; the reason it's nice is you're freeing your calling code from understanding the parser - which I don't think you can do here...
You can't use a "random" salt (such as one generated from the rand function) because then you can't calculate the hash later to verify they entered the correct password, unless of course you store that "random" salt in the database, which would defeat the purpose if your database is compromised.

Typically hash's are calculated using something like:
$hash = sha1($password."secretcode".$username); - none of which are random.

If you were to add a random number into that like this:
$rand = rand(1,99);
$hash = sha1($password.$rand);

Now you can't do if($hash1 = $hash2) { loginSuccess(); } because you will never know what random salt was generated for the original hash.
Oh, I'm sure it has plenty of good uses. But it's right that people should be concerned about the potentially bad ones.

In that case, though, I'm thinking that my instinct upon getting hit with a pain-causing weapon would be to mash the accelerator and try to drive out of range. Also, I don't think it would be all that effective on someone inside a metal car.