skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In open source, I take the opposite approach. I tend to take on large, difficult projects and get burned out working on them for too long. Combine this with wanting to get a lot of cool projects done, and my approach is to have lots of things in progress and switch between projects often. When I start to get tired or bored of a particular project, I switch gears so I can continue working at my usual pace without getting burned out.

I feel satisfied with the success of this approach so far. Among my large (with a scope of, say, 1000+ commits and/or 10000+ LoC), 2 are mature, 2 are WIP but suitable for practical use, and 2 are in their early stages. Among medium projects, maybe about 3 are mature and 5-10 are WIP. Dozens of smaller projects and experiments exist in various stages of completion as well.

I haven't finished everything yet, but I have got a lot done and I'm happy with the results. Getting over the initial hump is also a great way of getting others interested in contributing to open source projects, which expands thoroughput significantly. My advice is not to be scared of taking on lots of projects :)
Look at Chat when you have a free moment. Leave the app icon badge on but turn off intrusive pop-up notifications. Problem solved.
Do You Know the Location of Pooja Room in House? (Part 2) Vastu Tips
Just wait until they pay-wall all the things and drown out the children.
Sure, but without seniority of the interviewer, would his/her reference carry as much weight?

Instead of banking on an interviewer's reputation, you would in essence be asking companies to trust your ability "to understand interviewer strength and what they are qualified to evaluate". Not so sure how well that'll work...
There are nukes and there are nukes. You can build a nuke that produces a lot of fallout and contaminates large areas for decades, or you can build one that is just a big explosive with little if any side effects. If a particular problem can be solved by releasing a lot of energy in one place quickly then it's worth at least considering a nuclear explosion. As others have mentioned - nukes have been considered for peaceful engineering projects in the past, and successfully used in some, like closing off oil well fires that couldn't be extinguished in any other ways - small nuclear device solved the problem without any side effects.
Is anybody using C++ with UWP? I would have thought the obvious choice was C#.
Here is an example, they are simply rejected by FDA without explanation how to proceed (until the shitstorm starts): http://www.post-gazette.com/business/healthcare-business/201...
Rip DVD to Synology DiskStation DS418j for Streaming
Stow is a symlink farm manager... So yes?
> The main difficulty with using explosives to modify hurricanes is the amount of energy required. A fully developed hurricane can release heat energy at a rate of 5 to 20x10^13 watts and converts less than 10% of the heat into the mechanical energy of the wind. The heat release is equivalent to a 10-megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes. According to the 1993 World Almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate of 10^13 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.

The human race now uses ~1.8 x 10^13 watts.[0] But that's still less than half. Size does matter.

0) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption
Of all the words of mice and men, the saddest are, "It might have been.”
I agree, I hope this does well. Born around the time to be in "suitable age" when Amos the creator on Amiga, and similar things, where the foshnizzle.

This is a really cool thing with today though - the technical barrier to creating and publishing physical books (and ebooks too of course) is just so so low. Making it financially viable and worth it is another thing. I certainly hope this does well and will buy a physical copy.
If a person in the workplace is asked to implement quick search or some sophisticated algorithms on linked lists or binary trees there are only two possibilities: this is a low level and high importance project for NASA/Intel/Lockheed Martin, or one is being teased.
Was it botched? I'm not sure the intention was to ever run Motorola as a going concern. After selling the cable/home biz, cash on hand, deferred taxes, and selling the phone biz to Lenovo, they lost just $3.5B. But they kept all of the patents, defending Android from legal assaults into the future.

Pretty good deal IMO.
It will be too late when they act but I can't blame them - it is all about politics. With recent pyramid scheme it was something like:

1. It is as scam, why the regulators don't do anything!

2. Regulators added company to warnings list - people say it is not enough

3. Regulators launch formal investigation - people still say it is not enough but another group complains that government tries to interfere with entrepreneur

4. Some branches are closed shut down - people say it is regulators fault that caused massive withdraws.

5. Pyramid scheme company is dead, everyone complains that regulators didn't do enough and reacted too late.
You are taking this place to seriously.
HN has this built in, with the "noprocrastination" setting
We'll be seeing more and more of this as capitalism goes through its death throes. The next 20 years aren't going to be pretty.
Addiction normally requires:

* tolerance

* seeking

* preoccupation

* continuing even when you know it's causing you harm

Your use of hackernews might meet one of those (preoccupation) and maybe meet another (seeking -- what would you do if it was taken away from you?) but I don't think it meets the tolerance or the continuing after harm requirements.
a free market system is more efficient at producing the results that people actually care about (quality, safety, affordability, etc)

You have no evidence to support that view; where are the free markets full of safe, high-quality, low-cost medicines? Nowhere.

Markets are brilliant, but they are not flawless. All of our experience suggests that they need robust, independent regulation to avoid negative outcomes. There is plenty of scope for talking about how time-to-market for drugs can be improved, or other steps that can be taken to reduce regulatory burden where it's causing problems. But this whole 'let the free market sort it out' is the worst kind of high-school libertarianism.
Microsoft Programming Error Is Behind Dangerous Kernel Bug, Researchers Claim
JSX is just 'plain old functions' - just with some syntactic sugar on top to make it a bit easier to write. In fact, JSX compiles down to functions looking very similar to hyperscript...
Which is a business opportunity for technical users.
A helpful description of an uri-scheme (on its error page)
Practical IoT for facility management
Statistical Bias Types explained (with examples) – part1
Before giving my details I always take a look at the site.
If it looks professional and maybe I might indulge.

The problem here is that it would take any half decent developer less than a day to knock up a website similar to yours. So why should I trust you
good luck but not for me.
For a lot of physical skills, Techshop is the model I'd use. They run amazing classes, plus have a credentialing system in place to access certain kinds of equipment.
How We Ruined Airline Jobs
What’s the big secret? Neural networks decoded
Where I went to high school the pledge was optional.
Great link, thanks. Was any of this ever tried? Not necessarily using nukes, but perhaps in simulation or in smaller scale?
How did they botch it? Moto was a strategic acquisition for patents; Google never intended to keep the business.
Putting a corporation 'in jail' is essentially a death sentence, since no corporation is realistically going to survive that process. That would have lasting, negative repercussions for people who have committed not crime beyond being employed by someone who did.

I completely agree that more robust methods for punishing criminal corporate acts are required, but those can take many other forms – and I'd personally side with individual responsibility for illegal actions.
What I think it works best is following critics (professional or not) that you like and then use an aggregator (like IMDB, RT, Metacritic, etc, etc) to check what they say about a film. Algorithms can only go so far.

I use Filmaffinity, the community is fantastic. But reviews are only in Spanish.
That is way too dismissive, wrongly comparing total cyclone energy with what we can generate.

A more reasonable objection would be that we don't desire a radioactive cyclone. This is an obvious downside, though there are low-fallout designs (most energy from fusion) that aren't too bad. We did survive the 1960s after all.

We'd have to simulate and test many times. Better prediction capability, for both cyclones and nukes, would increase the chance of knowing if we made a difference.

Nukes might not be the best way. Silver nitrate cloud seeding was tried in the 1950s, but we can't know if it actually made a difference because we didn't have much ability to predict things back then. (wimpy computers) Another approach is to block ocean evaporation. Create an oil slick as large as the cyclone, and there you go.

Maybe we need all three at once: oil slick to weaken it, then nukes and silver nitrate to steer it. Note that this would likely be an operation that puts the Berlin airlift to shame.
"All our savings and our house went up in smoke because I shot them all on a volatile investment I knew nothing about" must come in a close second.
Funny, this could be extended to all sorts of investments. What if I spent 1000 USD on Apple in 1990? I'd have about 1000 Apple stock now, currently worth around 160k.
Would love to read this book. Any chance of a DRM-free ePub edition being made and put up for sale?
To paraphrase Carl Sagan, it was once an obviously stupid idea to believe the earth wasn't flat, or that the sun didn't revolve around it.

We should consider all the tools we have at our disposal and there shouldn't be any questions that are off limits and not allowed to be asked, however obviously stupid they appear.

Whoever asked this question was curious, imaginative, and wrong.

NOAA understands this and that's why they went to such lengths to provide a great answer to the question.

Your knee-jerk attitude of "nuclear weapons - bad!" is neither constructive nor scientific.
Ask HN: How to start getting influence on social media
I am a lazy Twitterer. I don't write very fluently. Unsurprisingly, my "social influence" is about zero.

Do you have some recommendations for books about how to manage a personal Twitter Account? On Writing better? On strategies to get and keep in touch with internet strangers?

Any tools you use?

What role do personal contacts (rather than online acquaintances) play in that context?

And, last but not least: What is your intention/profit from maintaining your online presence? Is it just fun? Or did you actually land a job/sell something/etc.?
They claim 91% accuracy on a balanced dataset. E.g. where there the ratio of gays to straights is 50:50. To get a ratio of correct:incorrect of 91:9 on such a dataset, their test must increase or decrease the odds a person is gay by 10.

Now in the general population, the ratio of gays to straights is about 16 to 984 (1.6%)†. So if their test gives someone a positive reading, that increases the odds to 162 to 984, or 14%. So you can't use this test to accurately guess someone's sexual orientation. Simply because gay people are so rare that even a few percent of straight people misclassified will overwhelm the number of actual gay people.

But nonetheless it is much more accurate than humans or the base rate. And it is scientifically interesting that there are physical features that strongly correlate with sexual orientation.

EDIT: another article claims this:

>However, when asked to pick out the ten faces it was most confident about, nine of the chosen were in fact gay. If the goal is to pick a small number of people who are very likely to be gay out of a large group, the system appears able to do so.

†These estimates vary by a lot and could be 3 times that, which would make the test much more accurate. Perhaps as high as 42% accuracy. And some people believe sexuality is more of a spectrum than a binary straight/gay. If so the test might be identifying straight individuals that lean more gay/bisexual than normal, and it's misclassifications wouldn't be so unreasonable.

The test may also give varying degrees of confidence, and it may give much higher confidence to some people than others. The edit I made confirms that, and there are some individuals that it can tell are definitely gay or straight. But for most it is more uncertain.
Scandals should work in that way so they make the senator unreelectable, instead of making the company invulnerable.

It's as if nobody else wants to sit in that chair!
EQUIFAX: Hackers may have the personal details of 143M US customers
I'm aware that nuclear tests are done at sea but there is always going to be fallout. The oceans and the planet is already contaminated enough. Fallout aside, we understand very little about weather. It's difficult to predict if it's going to rain tomorrow or not. We have no idea what happens to the weather if we manage to stop a hurricane...
Cute tool.
I like the way you highlight the 'matched' section on the textarea.
Couldn't you have done it all in a codepen ?
Great features developers might have missed in the Summer ’17 release
If judges can be persuaded to exclude medical experts because they went against what X company asserted then isn't the weakness in the system the judge?
This explanation is posted whenever earthquake lights are reported, but it's wrong. I have a few reasons:

First. So the explanation goes, during the earthquake power substation transformers and fuses blow, causing these lights. Problem is, the grid doesn't sustain that level of damage during these earthquakes. Yes, the power usually goes out and there is grid damage, but the amount of damage is nowhere near 'every substation blowing', even in the most severe quakes. So the number of lights and number of grid faults do not equal.

Second. Earthquake lights present in the sky, not on the ground beneath them. If substations were blowing and creating light, they would light objects in their immediate vicinity (e.g. buildings) more than they would illuminate clouds. But that doesn't happen, and in fact the lights appear within the cloud layers themselves rather than appearing as a projection onto them, as they would if the light source was at ground level.

Third. These lights have been witnessed out to sea and over offshore islands, where there is no power grid.

That last point is the most compelling for me, because I personally witnessed earthquake lights, less than a year ago, offshore, during the November 2016 7.8 Kaikoura earthquake. During that earthquake, I had this (night time) view: https://imgur.com/a/Nt2wD
I received an email aurora alert late last night UK time, so perhaps there was increased solar activity?
USGS (and most reports use the moment magnitude scale - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale :

Each point is 10 ^ 1.5 (about 31)

Every 2 points is 100

The Richter scale is almost never used now but that'd where the factor of 10 per point comes from.
What everyone else said, but also there's something around pharmacists have to fill the prescription as it's written, and cannot substitute generics.

So, if a dr writes "epipen" it needs to be an actual Epipn(TM) that gets handed over.

There's a UI aspect here too. Doctors use software, and if that software presents expensive non-generics first in the drop-down list that's the med that gets selected.

https://twitter.com/drmarkporter/status/765569736423927813

https://twitter.com/drmarkporter/status/765570038048911360

> Q for SystmOne GPs: is there a simple way to ensure default drugs offered when prescribing are cheapest versions most commonly prescribed?

> For context: our default omeprazole version (20mg) is currently 5 times price of one 4 down. Easily repeated costly error when busy.
This has in fact been asked on a what-if, by hundreds of people, and the author linked to this article:

https://what-if.xkcd.com/23/
Discussion here (although this article is better IMO): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15197287
As much as I see myself as wild person when it comes to offshoot bets, I still can't reason myself into buying bitcoins. Not sure I must be too Gen X to find this reasonable.

Anyone here comment "how well they did?" and if you've pulled out or are seriously thinking about pulling out?

I feel silly, but I'm still not going to put my hard earned cash in it any time soon... In fact, I wouldn't really know how.
This will depress many people
That's explicitly not what I said.

I know that flaws have and will continue to be discovered in those authentication systems, and also that a theoretical shift in liability occurs. Any bugs will need to be fixed, and that's important. But you can't ignore the situation in practice – liability is not being shifted, and all UK banks and credit card providers are pretty happy to refund fraudulent transactions regardless.
Of course, and that's why using nukes against hurricanes is a bad idea, but I don't think there's anything stupid about at least asking the question.
That's nothing like the return on BTC
This is addressed in the paper. The additional costs of larger sample sizes outweigh the costs of studies based on false positives.
Bot which works with realtors, not instead of them yet
BeeJ's guides don't get as much visibility as they deserve.
> Personally, I came to the conclusion that everything I postpone to a later stage in life might just as well never materialise. If I can't live with that thought, then it has to be done concurrently.

Sheryl Sandberg recently gave a talk to Inc. where she used the term 'ruthless prioritisation' to describe her decision-making process. It basically comes down to finding the best thing you can do and making a lot of tough choices.

Now, she was discussing this concept from a business point of view, but speaking as someone who works from home, minds children, and runs a house, it also resonated with me. I have a long list of things to do on any given day, and only a certain number of hours in which to do them. Most days, I end up feeling guilty about not getting something done; it feels like I'm failing in one of my areas of responsibility. Or, worse, as you say, I try to get everything done concurrently and either fail or risk burnout.

The main thing that ruthless prioritisation does is give me the space to forgive myself for the things I couldn't do. I know that I calculated the best thing I could do on a given day and I worked on that. It makes postponing things a lot easier to handle.
Lessons to Learn from the Top ECommerce Stores in the World
> This is an absurd comparison—major sports teams bid for extremely scarce talent

If you watch closely, the increased prices payed by sports teams are calculated in such a way to lower operating profit for the "team" (i.e . company) to a tax friendly point.
Popular when seen in relation to other options for decentralized storage perhaps. It might be a small group at the moment but they can still be large in a small space.
> I would be curious to see how the MIT academics play with the IBM consultants / engineers.

Almost certainly, the IBM engineers they play with won't be the typical contractors customers normally see. They'll be high-quality and knowledgeable.
Power-up in JavaScript with those reads (WeekendJS #109)
>you won't encounter a list of breaking changes and your code will continue to work.

Sure, that's why my gstreamermm app refused to build when I switched to --std=c++17
Choosing from AWS RDS MySQL and MySQL EC2
I COPIED DRAKE'S INSTAGRAM FOR a WEEK – #INSTAFAMOUS
Google should just stick with making their premium pixel product to showcase their technology. HTC mostly makes low-margin, decent quality phones in a large quantity. That doesn't seem interesting to Google.
Exactly their product
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nk0BT7tTWno

Not as well received though
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrv8i2X3gnI
I believe that you should be focused, but it is hard nowadays to be cutting your spectrum of interest. I understand his points, but still you need to like your job and develop yourself in it, you need something outside the job to keep mind healthy. Just don't go for more interests than 3. Job related, life related and sport related. There you have it.
There is no source, the gender spectrum is fundamentally based on rejecting science
We haven't had free markets for a very, very long time. Consequently, your claim of free markets unavoidably producing negative outcomes lacks evidence.

I didn't say we don't need any regulation, but I will say that government-imposed regulation isn't needed. A truly free market can and will fill that same need in ways that are much more efficient than any government could hope to do through force.
Well, that presumes that the promises would be kept
I hope the ML community won't have to suffer the same kind of fatigue syndrom that has plagued the javascript community for the last decade.
"Invest only what you can afford to lose" really are wise words. They aren't words that will get you insanely rich in the blink of an eye, of course, but they are words that mean you won't lose your house.
But does that mean anything? You could have made this kind of ROI with many assets. For example with stock options.

I have been telling people for years that "I am sure Bitcoin will grow a lot. I probably should invest. I'm just too lazy to dabble with the tech.".

And I have not invested even though I thought it would be a great investment.

But what if I did? I would not have invested more then $10k. Because it's such a volatile asset. If I did that 3 years ago, I would have made $60k or so. Nice. But I made more with less volatile investments in the same time. Simply because I invested more.

So by not investing in BTC, I did not miss much.
Ultimately a rather scary confirmation of the idea that some sort of at least semi-diplomatic relationship is essential between all states if we want to move towards a peaceful world rather than a continually hostile one.
This is a neat trick, but the example code (after fixing a typo, "decodeNonNegatve" to "decodeNonNegative") doesn't sort correctly:

["-10", "-11", "0", "1", "-1", "-2", "10", "11", "110"].map(encodeLong).sort().map(decodeLong)

Results in:

["0", "1", "10", "11", "110", "-11", "-10", "-2", "-1"]
I refuse to visit this website in order to preserve my own sanity. I was floating around forums trading BTC while it was $5. Life moves on, trees keep growing.
>How is this any more offensive or unlikely than stuff like digit ratio research?

Because it's based on the idea that gay men aren't real men. You have to be a little suspicious when scientific research comes out with findings that happen to exactly match the prejudices of the experimenters and/or the broader society. There used to be lots of "scientific" evidence for racist ideas too (see e.g. http://lrc.ohio.edu/lrcmedia/Streaming/lingCALL/ling270/myth...).

>Which is both scientifically interesting, and a strong argument for gay rights in places where it is still seen as some kind of sin or mental illness.

It's only an argument for gay rights if you presuppose that "fixing" gay people would be the right thing to do if it were possible. If you don't presuppose that, then it makes no difference whether or not people are "born gay".
There's overlap in authorship with this paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716
The problem is called deletionism and I (re)started http://deletionpedia.org/ because of this problem, currently at 50k+ articles in English.
Not only is it tremendously volatile, it's very easy for it to be lost or stolen from your wallet, or defrauded by the exchanges.

(Unless you're really good at information security and very disciplined. I'd be very uncomfortable keeping a £10k investment on a PC in my house.)