skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
the second group was immediately told the correct percentage the [federal] government spends on welfare (1 percent)

If the researchers reported "1 percent" as the actual federal government spending on welfare programs, they were themselves misleading people in the service of an agenda, perhaps by using an incredibly narrow legalistic definition of "welfare".

For 2009, Wikipedia reports $3.1 trillion in US federal expenditures. $224 billion, about 7%, went to Medicaid and SCHIP -- medical assistance to lower-income people -- which would fall under a common, casual definition of 'welfare'. Another $360 billion -- over 11%, went to a category Wikipedia calls "Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending", which appears to include ~$40 billion in unemployment compensation, at least $100 billion in "other income security", and $100 billion in food and housing assistance. Again, most people would consider most or all of this spending 'welfare'.

Even Social Security and Medicare -- as they often subsidize the spending of people with more money than they've paid in, especially low-income people -- have at least some component that would be fair to consider 'welfare'. Together, they are over $1.3 trillion of the federal budget -- more than 40%.

A plain English definition of 'welfare' from Princeton's WordNet is "governmental provision of economic assistance to persons in need". From the items listed above, one could easily make the case 15%-40% of the federal budget fits that definition.

And this is without even going into subsidies for the middle-class and corporations -- the home mortgage interest tax deduction, cash-for-clunkers, financial bailouts, farm subsidies -- which are also economic assistance, and ostensibly justified because the recipients are said to have some pressing need, and sometimes archly labeled 'welfare'.

(While I've used 2009 numbers, the 1999/2000 numbers -- when the Kuklinski UIUC study was published -- aren't that different in overall proportions. The respondents -- with their more-common answers of 5%/8%/11%/15% -- were all closer to the real values than the researchers' preferred 1% answer.)
The commercial is well done (It pulls lots of heart strings for some people), but it's ridiculous to assume those are the main use cases. 90% use will be for remote sex. But knowing Apple they'll probably detect nude flesh and censor it ;)
I agree though I can't really cite any exact examples besides the dialer software on my HTC Android phone is very clunky. Little things like putting the mute/speaker button stupidly close to the End Call button causes me a lot of grief. There's no easy way to conference in another call and juggling multiple calls with someone on hold is very clunky too. I usually just end up hanging up on people by accident.
I'm often left confused by people who downvote me without leaving a correction or counter-argument, so I guess I ought to explain why I've downvoted you here.

Who is the "you" in your sentence? The author of the comment to which you reply? They never mention the counter. The author of the original article? You're not replying to them.

And the counter isn't mentioned in the original prose, but it's clearly mentioned in the description of the algorithm. Surely that's reasonable. It's a single variable, hence constant to allocate in both space and time.

So your comment seems to make an unreasonable criticism that doesn't add value, and that's why I've downvoted it.
This would be a good way to learn.
Jaynes argument is roughly as follows: Consider how you would react to being shown evidence of, eg ESP or faith healing. I (for example) simply have a weaker prior belief in the possibility of faith healing than the possibility of being convincingly lied to. So being shown evidence of faith healing makes me very suspicious rather than causing me to believe in it. This is rational (given the my prior belief weighting).
Is there some background on this I should know about?
I totally agree that html/css with js and maybe even some basic php if they are up for it is the way to go.

Sure html and css aren't languages, but couple them with javascript and a complete novice can make quite a few dynamic pages (read programs) in an afternoon.

I think one of the most important elements for introducing young children, or really anyone, to programming is providing the ability to build a complete interactive program almost immediately. This can definitely be accomplished with a few html tags and a few lines of js.

Alternatively, if you have access to a licenses for it I would recommend initially starting them out in Visual Basic Studio. It strikes me as a good balance between immediate buildableness and a easy environment to learn the basics of loops, strings, if/then, for/do, etc. Maybe a week or two in vbs and then switch them over to js.

While I have no qualms with languages like ruby or python, the call for them to be used as introductory languages seem misleading. While you can learn to build a stand alone program in them in a week or less, I get the feeling that a static box program is not going to be that exciting for most 10-12 year olds today (obviously this same problem exists for vbs)

My feeling is that to most children computers are two things, the internet and video games. Building your own video games immediately (outside of flash which isn't a terrible suggestion) is somewhat out of reach for most beginners. But building web pages, and pretty interesting ones at that, is very accessible for anyone once they get the syntax down. In truth you have to get relatively far into ruby or python before you can understand how to display a page you've build or get to very much interactivity.
You can't polish a turd: On customer service
Tethering on Android doesn't require an additional plan.
"[H]aving lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that, the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment of others." -Benjamin Franklin in a speech during the Constitutional Convention of 1787

I'd be impressed to hear a presidential nominee quote this when faced with accusations of flip-flopping. I really respect people who change their positions based on new or better information, or simply more experience, so long as the change is genuine. In fact, I think it's the best way to live. Voters are not so forgiving or understanding, though.
"Openness" is one of those issues that gets brought up all the time and it's really more of a personal preference than a "hard feature" that makes one thing better than the other.

Most "features" are personal preference, that's how features get created/deployed, because someone somewhere decided it would be a good thing to build into the device.

Choosing based on openness is a risk management technique. While it's unlikely that Apple is going to go out of business or stop supporting the iPhone and many people change phone hardware every six months anyway, if something does happen the more open platform is one that has a greater chance of getting continued support for. On closed platforms, you often can't get continued support for love or money after its been EOL'ed.

A more realistic/pragmatic example is becoming dependent on a specific app and being able to install and use it (perhaps in an enterprise environment). If Apple decides to shutdown the app and not distribute it via iTunes, you're screwed (or you have to root the device, the ability or willingness to do so is also a risk management technique). With android, the device comes with the ability to install anything from anywhere, an app that no longer appears in the market is minor hiccup rather than insurmountable problem.
Worth the read. I usually (wrongly) associate creativity with the arts, but this article frames it as a crucial skill for effective problem solving. Is there a more fulfilling way to learn a subject than solving a real world problem that requires you to understand it?

It was especially encouraging to hear how schools can fulfill the standardized curriculum requirements without turning the kids into zombies:

[...] they’d unwittingly mastered Ohio’s required fifth-grade curriculum "from understanding sound waves to per-unit cost calculations to the art of persuasive writing. "You never see our kids saying, ‘I’ll never use this so I don’t need to learn it,’" says school administrator Maryann Wolowiec. "Instead, kids ask, ‘Do we have to leave school now?’"
What does manufacturing as a percent of GDP have to do with anything?

Case in point: You'd be pretty silly to think that the US isn't an agricultural powerhouse. However, only 2% of the US is employed in that industry which contributes 0.9% of GDP. However, it has one of the highest outputs in the world - and perhaps the highest per worker.

Another point: The US' manufacturing value is so high because it builds expensive goods. There is more innovation occurring with jet engines and airplanes than textiles.
http://cryptome.org/0001/wikileaks-dump.htm
Well, they get involved if you try to call yourself "Naked Jen" -- why can't they get involved if someone is dead. If there's a story in a reputable newspaper that says the guy is dead, what's the problem? At least stop poking people about reconnecting with teh dead guy. What's so freakishly hard about that??
Sounds like you're as much a Steve Jobs (or maybe just Apple) hater as this guy is a Steve Jobs lover. Maybe the article is a tad ridiculous, but at least some of the quotes are really good.
The Climate Reports
I was referring to jaspervdj, who is both the author of the comment to which I reply and the author of the original article (well, I presume).

The article states: "an element in array can, by chance, point to an element in marks, but this won’t matter since the element in marks won’t point back, and so we can determine it’s fake." This sentence is missing the part where the counter is made use of, and as such is erroneous. The mentioned element can point back, and its index must be compared with the counter to ascertain whether it is valid.

Although that is a small omission, it is in no way trivial, and probably the source of all the confused comments the posting received.
Would greatly appreciate suggestions for improvement.
"You can enjoy a story without it being accurate."

Tell that to Twain. He rails on Cooper.
Speaking in your head is called subvocalization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocalization) and many forms of speed reading get the learner to eliminate it.

Subvocalization has several draw backs. One is that it is very bad at multitasking (eg. try reading this comment while counting).

It turns out that when you are subvocalizing, you send tiny impulses to your throat as though you are speaking, just not strong enough to do so. So it is possible to eavesdrop on subvocalization (NASA has experimented with this -- see wiki article).

Some people naturally don't subvocalize because of learning disabilities; they usually have trouble writing and speaking because they have to translate their thoughts into English.

Of course the idea that you are thinking in a language is rather terrifying. Consider how it is moulding your thoughts. The idea that language effects your thoughts is called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. (Some people have tried to make better languages to think in, see lojban.)

I find it interesting to note that when I program, I think, at least partially, in that language -- I've even noticed that I attach sounds to some operators in C. I also notice that the way I think varies depending on the area of math I'm working in: when I am doing algebra or calculus, it's a combination of subvocalized math and visualisation of formulas, whereas complex analysis is often almost entirely visual and set theoretic topology often is neither subvocalized or visualised.

/rant
just to chime in, jaspervdj is the commenter, the submitter, the website is calles jaspervdj.be so it is reasonable to guess he is the author (he is btw).
In any case, why shouldn't the "collateral murder" video have been editorialized? I don't care if the soldiers were obeying the ROE and had the right to defend themselves. They still are the invaders, and the invasion is still illegal

I think this is the core of our disagreement; because while I agree with you I abhor the idea of pushing an agenda and opinion on anyone. The video could have stood for itself; instead I believe Assange weakened it via it's presentation in an effort to raise the profile of Wikileaks.

If Assange stokes the masses and gets people angry, I am perfectly fine with that.

It matters; it matters a lot. Because the editorial was gleeful and gloating. It was saying "screw you US government" - and that is silly because the video stands for itself.

That Wikileaks has an agenda is, in my mind, wrong - when the information you present/possess comes from secret sources and contains highly controversial material it should be treated objectively.

I don;t care of Wikileaks languishes in obscurity like Cryptome; enough people know of it that anything seriously big (like the video) will make the media.

These sites are important simply by existing because they present a critical danger to those who want to abuse government positions; I don't want someone aggrandizing and pretentious and seemingly biased as those politicians presenting the information.
Non-registration required link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/business/11digi.html?src=b...
I thought that brown bread I got at just about every Irish B&B was great! Then again, I'm from the US.
A video phone isn't for routine phone calls or for marriages or funerals, but there are lots of family events in the middle. It's common for relatives to sometimes be unable to show up for birthdays or Christmas. I have an aunt who bought a video phone to do that when she's in Florida.
While this may be, history does not show that that's the case. Apple has always provided a more consistent environment to develop against than Microsoft did/could (because Apple controls the hardware), and there's always been both more developers and more software for Windows. One could play the quality card here, but all that matters is the quality of the apps that are used and that there is a demand for, not the average quality of all apps ever. No one cares if a Homer Simpson soundboard app is of low quality.

That the official twitter app couldn't run on 27.3% of Android owners most likely reflects more on the developers of the app than on the platform (or on the schedule the developers are working against). "Serious developers" for a platform ensure that their product sufficiently meets their target market (the "27.3% of android owners" number assumes that 100% of android owners even wanted to run the official twitter app, the way you've worded it). This is pretty straight forward to do with Android: acquire and test against all the popular devices out there. You can even run and compile against older versions of the SDK without issue. Sure, this is more work, but that's your target demographic and it's something that people have been doing for at least as long as Windows has been popular. It's not like twitter doesn't have the cash to do this.
Yeah, it's Safari. And yes, if there is a web app that requires a hover or drag, you're kind of screwed. It's not often, but between the Flash issue and the less than awesome Javascript, and the lack of certain common ui elements (drag and hover), it's not all that uncommon to find problems with the iPad Safari.

But I'll take it, warts and all.
Normally the operator sends apn settings with a system called ADC so that apn name changes or new apn can be sent to subscribers via this push Method
His fundamental argument is logically flawed on a very basic level. It's simply insane to think that an ecosystem that has been operating in a certain manner for its entire existence will suddenly change directions and begin operating in a massively different manner. It's not going to happen. Betting on a platform that may in the future become awesome instead of voting on a phone that you admittedly think might be the best phone on the market is as crazy as betting on a horse that looks like it has the potential to win instead of the horse that is winning. It just doesn't make any sense.

There are many legitimate reasons to switch from iPhone to Android. He hasn't convinced me this is one of them.
Knowing your food; Palo Santo Marron beer from Dogfish Head.
Beautiful. These would make great page banners.
There it is:
"WikiLeaks will NOT be abandoned. Don't listen to disinfo being spread! We'll issue clarifications soon. Should've done earlier." http://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/18289990888
I've never understood idea that computers will help education. Great education has been happening for thousands of years; obviously computers are unnecessary for good education. Personally, I feel like the three R's is a much more effective educational idea than the computers in the classroom idea. You will ultimately have to teach the R's, it's never been clear to me how computers would help teach them.
We need organizations that are true watchdogs of the government. Governments should be made uncomfortable by the press.

However, WikiLeaks lost me when they released selectively edited video, spliced in editorial overlays, registered a domain name "CollateralMurder" and advocated a position.
That's kind of what I thought too. I have been using video calls for ages. Yes really - ages. First time using my htc TyTN/Hermes. Nowadays using my Nokia N900.
It's weird your post got downvoted. Someone care to take a guess on why? I would (guess) but I honestly can't find any reason at all besides fanboyism and I don't want to acknowledge that such things happens around here...
I believe that would be "bipentquadium". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_element_name)
I think this article has riled up quite a few folks, there's nearly 1500 comments in this nytimes article!!!
Ruby 1.9.2 RC2 is released
Cute hostnames are pretty obnoxious. My preferred method of building out datacenters is more self-documenting, and I've done it on 4 rack colo buildouts and 100 rack colo build-outs.

I just use a naming format of Loc-Cabinet-Rackspace.

In my Seattle datacenter I know that sea-c01-s1 is a server thats in my seattle datacenter, cabinet 1, slot 1. I know it's PDUs are plugged into port 1 of PDU-LEFT and PDU-RIGHT in that cabint. I know it's two ethernet ports are plugged into Port 1 sea-c01-sw-left and sea-c02-sw-right. I know it's LOM cable is plugged into port 1 of sea-c01-sw-mgmt.

(I handle multi-U spaces by naming the server based on the bottom most rackspace it uses, and I stay consistent. If Sea-c01-s1 takes 10 rackspaces, then the server above it is sea-c01-s11. Beyond that, my configuration management tools tag spare resources when needed, and release them when unneeded. Cute hostnames are of no use to me, or anybody building out a datacenter that they'd like somebody else to be able to manage without months of knowledge dump.
I typically use a Nexus one, but I recently had to use an iPhone 3G to do some car navigation. I have had a general preconceived notion that the iPhone has a superior UI to Android--probably due more to reading about it than to actually using the device--and I was shocked at how much clunkier the iPhone 3G felt as compared to the Nexus. Scrolling and zooming were slower, the GPS indicator of position felt significantly laggier than on the Nexus, and the screen was a lot less crisp and bright. And that's not even getting into the fact that the "car navigation" feature on Android is far superior than what the iPhone was capable of displaying. Everything felt so laggy that I rebooted the iPhone to give it a chance to reset itself to a good state (to no avail.)

Now obviously the Nexus one is about a year and a half newer than the iPhone 3G (July 11, 2008 vs January 5, 2010 according to Wikipedia), and it may be that the 3Gs is much more comparable, but the 3G was only discontinued in the past few months so there are a lot of them in the wild still. There is a perception that the iPhone is plain superior, period, but a lot of the iPhones actually in peoples's hands are really not.
What I've found:

- Lots of people will think of your contradictory fact as a
Dirty Rotten Trick
- If your fact contradicts their preconceived notion, they
assume you're a liar and a cheat
>That's why I get so hung up if I see or discuss something I can't remember the word for. I go into a waiting-for-IO state where I can't precache the right word :)

I've a terrible memory and it's been getting worse, sometimes I'll use a temporary variable until the relevant part of my brain has recalled the proper term - this can be for abstract concepts, names or other nouns. Kinda like when one uses the term "whatsit" or "thing-a-me-bob" in physical speech.

I find that words come to me sometimes days later, especially when it's a given name.

My grandfather had alzeimer's and mother is convinced she is going that way, I'm only in my 30s though - it is a bit worrying but also fascinating to consider the internal machinations.
That's just about the most generous possible interpretation of what's been happening with Wikileaks.

A less generous interpretation:

* Wikileaks leaked the video that accompanies a detailed transcript (with quotes) of the same video that appeared in the Washington Post many months beforehand --- a PR black eye to be sure, but in no way a revelation.

* Wikileaks has in fact cultivated confidential sources inside DoD and military service agencies that are talking about forwarding cables and other TS-classified material, and is in fact part of a grave threat to national security (which, true, the real "threat" is clearly the negligent lapses in operational security that allow someone like Manning to leak cables in the first place).

In other words: Wikileaks is less valuable to society than it seems, and at the same time the government has a legitimate (if misdirected) concern with them.
Thank god this wont happen. I live just north of San Luis Obispo and would be left with the same old mess. Better would be to fix the mess in Sacramento. A new governor with a more pragmatic outlook, Jerry Brown, passing the initiative to remove the budget supermajority would be a good start.
I disagree; I've been involved in products whose sales involve the sizes of TCAMs on a Cat6K and the particulars of BGP regex filters, and while it was vital to have someone who could address those questions involved in the sale, and while the decision on the sale was being made by people who know what those things mean, it was pure sales execution that turned the engagement from a science project to a "nice to have" to a "must have" to a purchase order.
One of the smartest things my parents did was never put a TV or computer in my bedroom. That kept me from being up all hours of the night leaving me exhausted for school the next day.

I don't think I'd be the person I am today without a computer growing up. I used GEOS to type my papers on a Commodore 64 in elementary school. I was "online" with Quantum Link (precursor to AOL) and BBSes when I was 6. Since then every new technology has basically seemed like a twist on the same concepts from the 80s.
So? What does that have to do with the actual phone.