skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If we're talking about America's youth, they need three things.

1) A functional healthcare system like any of the other half a dozen good alternative approaches in other developed nations.

2) For the government to stop inflating the cost of education by enabling universities to raise their prices outside of market forces (eg income growth) via perpetually greater government loan backing. Compare the median income vs median tuition costs, just from the late 1990s vs today, the government made that imbalance possible. For a century the US had very reasonably priced universities (40 years ago you could pay for an Ivy League education with a part-time job), that ended in the very early 2000s when the government inflation run took off (exactly in tandem with healthcare inflation and dollar debasement under the Bush Administration, which you can see represented in the commodity bubbles, housing, gold and the dollar GDP of every other nation soaring simultaneously from the year 2001 to 2008).

3) Significantly improved cities. More people from rural America need to be encouraged to move into urban centers, to resolve the opportunity & quality of life gap (such as falling life expectancy in rural US) that is widening between the two. That includes improving infrastructure, transportation, and available housing supply (entailing, among other things, pushing back against overly aggressive zoning laws used to restrict housing). Urban improvement / renewal, would benefit basically every demographic, including poor black communities that are being persistently hammered by extreme violence.

A possible #4 candidate, would be to continue ending the war on drugs, shifting to treating addiction as a health matter and decriminalizing or legalizing all drugs. Sentencing reform and police reform would also go with that item.

Doing these things would radically improve the circumstances for America's youth as a whole.
The young need something big to transfer relative wealth from the old. It is getting crazy. With rich people living into thier 90s those who inherit are generally already in thier 60s or even 70s. The family money is moving between retirement funds. Something like a gold rush would move that value into the hands of the 30 or 40-somethings where it might do something more.
No. The main theory is that the sensors for face detection will be used for ID purposes since they couldn't get TouchID working _through_ the screen.
We need a lot more technical articles here and a whole lot less political ones.
Ask HN: Is there a group encrypted file-sharing with API and affiliate program?
- affiliate program with monthly residual

- multiple encryption methods

- multiple interfaces(windows, mac, android, ios, web(javascript encryption), api)

if it doesn't exist is there enough interest for someone build to build it?
Thanks for your clear answer. I appreciate it.

I'm a bit surprised so many people have the time and inclination to be upvote police.
I appreciate your call to take a cause seriously by making changes in one's personal life.

That said, every time I read someone advise "stop having babies" to combat climate change, I am reminded of the South Park episode wherein the overzealous hunters claim that deer overpopulation will cause some deer to die, so they need to kill the deer to prevent overpopulation and future deer deaths.
Here's a list of methods to choose your pricing: https://taprun.com/methods/
Some articles suggested that Apple tries to embed scanner in the screen, and if they don't manage to do it, it'll be placed on the power button instead. Of course these are just rumours
I was just thinking about this last week because of that old CodingHorror post so I was quite surprised to see it here as a new idea. I was actually just expecting a link or two at the bottom of the article.

Also, I have misused rip-off here; I didn't mean to say you defrauded/cheated/stole anything, just that it's an old idea already going around. I apologize for incorrectly using this verb and accusing you of ripping off this idea.
What's crazy is everyone knows Amazon's ranking is crap, except apparently Amazon - and it's been crappy in the same way for 10 years.
The original title was:
> Facebook is steering users to donate to a small org no one has heard of

... which has quite an implication. I don't feel worried about: '[t]hose of us who have head about the poor job Red Cross has been doing,' but uneducated folks who just scanned this particular headline.

One thing to clarify is that the original title looks like it was Buzzfeed's, not the submitter. And it seems like Buzzfeed realized at some point the original title was too inflammatory. I could have done a much better job at checking this and redirecting my ire elsewhere for sure.
If this were actually a thing, you wouldn't need to capitalize the the G in grammar.
I'm a little confused, has this person contributed to science in any significant way ? If not why should we listen to this person and ignore scientists who have actually achieved success in their field ?
Yes, crypto trading. Nobody is into mining anymore.
Reads a little like "we need people to sell shovels and gold pans to, while simultanously keeping the young distracted enough to stay out of our politics".
This article should be titled 'almost all remaining economic opportunity has been systematically monopolized by large corporations'
Google might want to look at the history of Standard Oil and the old US wide singular Bell Telephone. If you get so big that you can abuse your power, you will probably start to do so (power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely ...). They tend to get broken up into less powerful pieces. How you break up Google, I don't know. They are an ad tech company with the best search engine and a bunch of money loosing ancillary activities.
Said a journalist working a 9-to-5 job by choice.
Do you mind sharing the organization's name?
There has to be some middle ground between these ideas, surely.
1) The definition of "major hurricane" is one of Category 3 or greater. Sandy was only a 1.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml#m

2) The actual topic of discussion here is whether climate change makes hurricanes worse. Unless you have some evidence that climate change was responsible for Sandy's track, its connection with the topic is dubious at best. Do you have such evidence?

Edit: No, they're not "more frequent", either.

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/All_U.S._Hurricanes.html
I didn't say that, and you're (probably intentionally) misreading my post.

Your original complaint was that they insulted Google by taking a policy stance against them, and that they might as well have made a title regarding sex acts. I was telling you that is ridiculous.
First-time author unwittingly exposed house of cards beneath “bestseller” books
"Doing business"? Hell, setting foot in Israel puts you on a blacklist in many Arab countries, to the extent where if you do this often you generally carry two passports. Goes the other way around too... try going into Israel after having Lebanon or Syria stamps on your passport and enjoy an hour in a dimly lit room answering questions to a couple of stone faced idf officers.
That's an interesting hypothesis, but I'd want to see more evidence that "a reviewer who believes its true rating should be 3 stars is motivated to give it 1 star."

Surely you can't prove this simply by noticing that there are many 1- and 5-star reviews, as there could be many other reasons for that. One obvious one: people who strongly like or strongly dislike a product are more likely to take the time to review. I personally have never felt the need to review something if I felt "meh" about it.

One sample study might be to see how people's ratings change if they have a chance to see the average rating first or not, but that would be a tricky study as you'd need to get people to buy something without seeing the ratings.
There used to be a calculator by NOAA:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/epz/?n=wxcalc_floodperiod

that is now here:

https://www.weather.gov/epz/wxcalc_floodperiod

According to it, the probabilities of a 500 year event in the next 500 years is 63.2%.

What I like to call flippism point, i.e. when you have the same chances as flipping a (perfect) coin is next 346 years.

A three consecutive years series does seem a bit "queer".
All that still doesn't explain why in properly controlled double blind trials, people still haven't been able to demonstrate the ability to distinguish between different sample rates above 44.1kHz though...
Which they did for a while, but we didn't respond by abandoning the entire line of argument, which would have been silly.
> If you can't sell the tooling on its own merits to people in your company, you have no business mandating its use.

That assumes that a) such dept has the capacity to understand the advantage of using such tool and b) other depts have time to go and try to sell them that.

Users always resist change.
I do walking for 30 minutes at the middle of the day while thinking about the task or problem that I'm facing during that time. It just always amaze me that good ideas pop up in my mind when I walk.

For those who are stressed and overwhelmed, I would advise to take a walk. And also for those who want to be creative, take a walk. It's a productivity hack.
agreed! i cover this topic here: http://pgbovine.net/PG-Vlog-26-what-does-academia-mean.htm
This fear is well founded. Assuming that a person doesn't accidentally crack their screen the first thing to break on an iPhone is the home button. Long time heavy users of iPhones almost always have to resort to the accessibility buttons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seeing_Like_a_State talks a lot about local knowledge being useful and inpenetrable to higher level organizations.

Related to this topic: Houston requiring a permit to feed homeless: http://www.khou.com/news/local/houstons-homeless-feeding-ban...
That was not the IRB's objection. I don't know where you're getting that (except as a devil's advocate position you thought of?). They were objecting to him using something other than pen (even though pencils were in common use for these very patients at that hospital with no IRB objection), not insisting that he use something safer than both pens and pencils.
They call it a tricopter when it's a Y6 hexacopter. That's enough to make me dubious about them. That and the rider sitting so close to completely unguarded 600mm+ props with their squishy innards in the plane of the props (so even if the rider stays clear, a failing prop could easily kill them). It's fine as a demo but insane to use regularly or offer to the public.

Further down the page: "We are planning to get prepared to accept and fulfil your order already in 2016." Good to know. At least their latest concept illustration seems to address the props-of-doom issue.
The 2016 election is a extreme outlier for many reasons, so it's difficult to look at it and make any meaningful conclusions in this regard.
Yeah, WTF, the dotcom and post financial meltdown recoveries were great, but, looking back at the 70s, the 80s and early 90s, I don't think people thought "optimism". If anything, we were in the midst of the full swing into rust belting of the Midwest, Detroit was under heavy attack and in debt fighting off foreign rivals, and the whole Wolf of Wall-Street 80s syndrome.

WTF, do today's kids just expect things to land on their laps?

That said, I know lots of people in near blue collar jobs who do work hard and don't take things for granted and don't carry a woe is me attitude. So, not everyone lacks resilience.
> I couldn't put out press release on my amateur research and expect to get articles printed in several national papers, simply because they wouldn't take me seriously.

"Expect?" No.

But:

- Write a press release with a sufficiently "useful" headline. Ideally add some research with a conclusion that supports the headline, too, but that's really optional. Write well, and offer lots of both clever "sound bytes" and entire copy-pasteable paragraphs. Journalists are busy and/or lazy.

- "Useful" means that it fits a narrative being advanced by the part of the press you're interested in. However important your story is, without that hook it goes nowhere. With the right hook, a story about goats in Siberia can end up on the front page. These days, a novel edge on the ways that tax cuts shockingly benefits people who pay a lot of tax ("the rich") more than people who pay less or no tax ("the poor") is a shoe-in.

- You'll need some sort of credential, but not much. By the time anyone figures out your PhD is in marine biology and not economics or tax policy or Siberian goats, or the think tank or NGO you're chief researcher of operates out of your kitchen, the world will have moved on.

- Finally, you need a bit of luck, ingenuity and cheekiness getting the release in front of a journalist. Most of them are on Twitter and Facebook, and that seems to be where they do most of their research anyway, so that's a good start. You're going to want to offer them an exclusive.

Incidentally, this is basically how all of these "think tanks" operate, except with a few established press contacts and a sort of short-circuited credentials loop.
As far as I can tell they do not have a BitLicense, they just applied for one. The wikipedia page you linked even includes the 3 companies who have been granted one so far, and none are Bittrex.
I believe the guarantees around final fields were only added in java 7 - possibly the author is using something older?
No, they use it the first day, and then progressively less. Since this has happened a few times with different tools management has abandoned hope.
Perhaps I missed it, but are all the ants alive in this raft? Seems tricky to manage without some of them being submerged underwater for an extended period of time..
Shorting a bubble also involves timing the peak and decline, I don't feel confident in my ability to do that (or anyone's tbh). I'm not knowledgable enough about Bitcoin markets or how shorting works to make a rational decision - it'd be a pure bet.

First time round I got into Bitcoin and was able to time the peak right (by luck) and made enough for a few nice dinners, should've held onto them though.

This time my strategy is just to buy and hold - my hypothesis being that there is a small chance Bitcoin/crypto will form the basis of a new economic mode - if it isn't and it crashes to zero, I'm only in as far as I can lose my stake completely (or lose my nerve and cash out what's left which is also highly likely). I am a very boring and amateur investor. I am the dumb money :)
My thoughts exactly. You can't base a person/nation's health on extraordinary events. The article sounds a lot like saying "ohhh, I'm hangover, better drink more so that I don't suffer from it".

This is one of the things that are very wrong with a lot of people in charges: they want magical solutions, quick fixes for the next elections.

It's true the real solutions, the long term ones, the ones that matter most, are hard to set up right: education, research, building trust, leading by example...

And it's far easier to sell a new gold rush: people love those stories, it gives hope, it's fun and simple to comprehend. Even better, it puts the blame on the people instead of the leaders since if they don't live the great life, it's because they failed to grab the opportunity. The American dream in essence.

The fact that there can be only so many gold rushes, so many factions that will have the control of it (and the others can go to hell), and so many people from those factions that will actually benefit from those are not issues that will occur to the minds of the targets of this strategy. It's why it's such a good one.
That's a common misconception. It was really "do know evil".
I spent a lot of time analyzing the startup time of Java, Python, and Node.js. For any real-world program, startup time is entirely dominated by time taken to load code into memory, which in python is import statements. Also, as slow as Python 2.7 is, Node.js, at least when I measured it, was twice as slow.
I don't know how much of this is really new. I spent my youth watching TV and playing Sega and computer games. By age 12 I had seen every episode of "All In The Family" at least twice. I stayed up watching TV on school nights until 1AM.

I also do believe I received bad parenting, but eventually I turned out OK.
1) This mechanism is already present in the current electoral system and is very evident in the election of Trump.

2) This is the reason to only replace 25% if the parliament per year so that not all experience is lost. It gives more power to non-elected public officials which can be good or bad.

3) By removing reelection you also remove career politicians and reduce corruption. No need for campaign contributions or campaigning promises. Also, the drafted people would go back to their social circles to be judged by their peers after ended term of office where they would have to own their decisions.
the technology is pretty robust now. I used the eyeX, but any of them are going to be good performers.
> #6 Give yourself a break

This is the most important bit in my experience. I had a pretty successful PhD and I loved my time as a PhD student. I'd have days or even weeks when I just didn't feel particularly motivated, and when that happened, I didn't sit at my desk twiddling my thumbs, I took the day off. Maybe read some papers, but almost never forced myself to do hands-on work if I wasn't feeling it. Having an advisor that grants you this kind of flexibility, as well as the flexibility to let you take on projects that make you feel motivated, is pretty important for a successful and non-torturous PhD, IMHO.

(Meanwhile I know of other advisors whose students would come into the lab 7 days a week and try to sell their work-life balance by telling the story of this one time when one guy the afternoon off on a Friday to go skiing. It's bizarre to me that some advisors think that kind of whip-cracking is the right way to make creative endeavors successful.)
I admit I logged in to HN to make the same grammar correction. Fewer/Less grammar errors bug me badly. I don't know why this particular grammatical error bugs me so, but every time I encounter it, I have an inner voice that yells 'fewer.' My family hates me for it.
Are you the kind of person who considers 24/384 not being good enough? Chasing 384KHz and beyond by buying $1000 USB cable to the DAC?
I wonder if a system that assigned weights to each individual user's rating based on that user's rating history could help there - if a user always rates products with 5-stars, then another 5-star rating shouldn't have nearly as much weight as one coming from a user that gives a fairly balanced range of ratings.

I'm not sure if that would actually work better in practice, but it's at least an interesting idea.
Except that fire ant stings are guaranteed to be painful. Not all tick bites are guaranteed to give you Lyme's disease.
Selena Gomez Instagram hacked Hackers post Bieber nude photos
A UV-laser would be humane, since UV (and shorter wavelengths) will interact with the outermost portion of your eye - visible light or the near IR (up to 1500) is what your imaging system operates on and it's focused onto the retina.

Edit: Also, the blink reflex isn't fast enough to save you from damage if the Class is higher than Class 2 (and even then it's a roll of the dice, since there are some who don't have that fabled reflex).
a lot of the altcoins are premined, so you don't really need to be mining

there's a lot of money being made in ICO's
Yes, there are tons of cryptocoins projects just right now besides of Bitcoin, even some of them almost reaching the level of Bitcoin (Ethereum) and with the ICO-hype trying to be next Kickstart/Sillicon-Valley on cryptocurrencies is basically like chasing digital gold. The question is what coin to mine, not what coin is popular right now... personally i made solid money with dogecoin, was able to buy 2 BTC's when mining that coin was super-cheap.
Here's an analysis from a couple years ago: http://minimaxir.com/2014/06/reviewing-reviews/

In particular, the conclusion:

"The reviews on Amazon’s Electronics products very frequently rate the product 4 or 5 stars, and such reviews are almost always considered helpful. 1-stars are used to signify disapproval, and 2-star and 3-stars reviews have no significant impact at all. If that’s the case, then what’s the point of having a 5 star ranking system at all if the vast majority of reviewers favor the product? Would Amazon benefit if they made review ratings a binary like/dislike?"
The editors' response: http://physics.nyu.edu/sokal/SocialText_reply_LF.pdf
Reasonably high density, pedestrian friendly, sense of community, what's not to like?
Yes, I misused rip-off and now after a quick search I found that it has a much more negative meaning than I intended.
It is not just whether it makes them worse but also whether it makes them more frequent. If the country is experiencing more highly damaging storms who cares whether they're category 3 or not?
so flip the phone over?
Why R is bad for you?
$600 AMD RX 580s tell me that someone is definitely still into mining.
Why should a career in party politics improve your ability to make these decisions?

Do current law makers have to pass some kind of knowledge based test to be allowed to make the decisions?
what does functional programming have to do with it? you still unit test functions in functional programming surely?

> It's like saying all data should be declared as variable, in the functional programming paradigm, functions are data. That's why closures are useful.

I don't think you understand what you're talking about. We were already talking about using 'functions as data', and closures and anonymous functions aren't the same thing.

But anyway, how do you unit test an anonymous function?

I assume you mean that you don't, you just test the bigger context around it. But that was my point, once your anonymous function starts becoming much bigger than a one-liner it ought to be tested itself.
I don't know about others, but growing up during the recession made me extremely defensive in terms of my risk taking and spending. I view risk as a luxury that is bought, buying the ability to mitigate the personal downsides. A gold rush is a bandaid, a lottery winners dream, to create the freedom to take risk.

I know, risk is something that is most easily taken by the young, the uninhibited, the unindentured, but many of us are indentured to loans, inhibited by our memories, and too busy trying to get old safely to act young.
There is no doubt the pets.com equivalent of ICO startups that won't deliver anything of value. On the other hand, the googles, and Amazons of the crypto world are being built today and if they provide enough value they will survive when the liquidity tide washes away.
As a current PhD student in a highly competitive program, I wish I could say this is reasonable advice, but it's wishful thinking in the hyper-competitive environment at top tier universities (where the goal of a PhD student would be to graduate as faculty material).

There is just no way around grinding out the experiments. You literally have to will something to work in multi-month long pushes where you iterate again and again until you figure it out.

Deep work is good and nice for the theoretical parts, but all the academic superstars/upcomers I know work super long AND super hard to make conference deadlines all the time.

Of course, if you just want to graduate without stressing all that much or much ambition, this might work.
Example on How to Use TensorFlow's Estimator, Experiment and Dataset API's
Battery, bulb, wire, fingers?

It's not about the knowledge. It's about the time together.

Good luck.
Well, string is nice, but sometimes you just need a cheat day. I don't try to keep an unbroken string, instead I try to cross off as many days in a month as I can.

The point is that you should create a meta-habit of checking your habits. A daily reminder.
Ecseller.ru Review