skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From the actual study (p.36): https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/1_krueg...

"These regressions are difficult to interpret for a number of reasons, but if cross-county differences in opioid prescription rates can be taken as an exogenous result of differences in medical practices and norms conditional on personal characteristics and broad region dummies, the effect of the growth in opioid prescriptions on labor force can be estimated. In particular, I assume that the based opioid prescription rate coefficient reflects inherent differences across regions, and the interaction between prescriptions and time captures the effect of changes in prescriptions on labor force participation over time. This is a big leap, and ideally I would have preferred to have a baseline measure of prescriptions (country-level MME data are unavailable before 2010), so this calculation is at best considered illustrative. These caveats aside, opioid prescriptions per capita increased by a factor of 3.5 nationwide between 1999 and 2015, which is the equivalent of 0.55 log units. Multiplying 0.55 by the coefficient on the interaction between opioids and the second period (.011), suggests that the increase in opioid prescriptions could account for perhaps a 0.6 percentage point decline in male labor force participation, which is 20 percent of the observed decline in this period."
Essential reminds me of Handspring who made palm PDA's with an expansion slot (which is what the essential technically has). I feel like its going to end up like Palm by folding back into Google.
Has that guy never been addicted to anything?

I could stop doing my shameful and deplorable thing any time I want to, but I will probably never want to stop as long as I keep doing it.

There is a button inside your brain labelled "do that again!", and it is an integral part of animal behavior control, to reinforce things that tend to increase survival potential. If you do something that pushes the button, you're probably going to do it again. And if you do multiple things that push it, you're going to do most often the thing that pushed it the hardest.

Eating food gives it a light tap, but nicotine mashes it really hard. That's why I decided a long, long time ago to never even touch a tobacco cigarette with my fingers, much less put one in my mouth. I'm afraid that not only would I not be able to stop, but that it would displace my lesser addictions, like overeating, video gaming, binge reading, and my other non-salubrious habits, so that I die from lung cancer instead of heart failure, which is the barrel I'm staring down now.

Why couldn't I have been addicted to exercise and fresh vegetables, right?
I believe in my case, the population would be people who can make it to the store - unchanged from what it was before the store started limiting quantities.

I'm having a hard time not getting snarky here because, to be honest, you don't seem to be arguing in good faith.
I don't know why they would disable it, or why it would be neglectful for them not to, from a business perspective. As long as they are charging the same prices for the same supply/demand ratio that they normally would, then it's not considered gouging (I don't know if they are or not). Granted, it would be nice for them to disable it so that people can get affordable flights, but they are a business after all is said and done, and I have no doubt they'll fill all their seats regardless of the prices.
Speaking for myself, Unicode's original fundamental mistake was one that could only be recognized as a mistake in hindsight: insisting on round-trip compatibility with existing encodings.

Round-trip compatibility meant Unicode had to not only adopt but permanently preserve all the mistakes and inconsistencies of encodings which were popular at the time. Which is how we get a bunch of duplicates, a bunch of code points that are there but only supposed to be used for round-tripping, some of the un-fun edge cases for Latin text where things have both composed and decomposed forms, some of the weirder aspects of equivalence and normalization, etc.

At the time it seemed like a smart and rational thing to do since it meant you could losslessly transition from your existing character set, and then losslessly go back to it if you wanted to, but now that Unicode "won" it's just a source of "well, that's annoying and inconsistent but they needed it for round-tripping" explanations.

In particular, round-trip compatibility meant that Unicode ended up containing a bunch of variant forms of things that existing encodings treated as distinct characters, but which probably would not pass the test of being distinct graphemes by Unicode's definition. Declaring the variant forms to be a contextual issue left up to the font or the rendering system would have been better,

Ironically, the second big mistake was to then try to switch philosophies and do just that with the CJK characters, sparking the whole Han unification mess.
Just because you don't like how markets work doesn't mean a market failure has occurred.

If you would like goods to sell at lower prices during times of crisis, you are free to start stockpiling them now (or convincing others to do so) and selling them the next time a crisis arises. We don't need to bring coercion (AKA govt) into the equation, you can meet your own needs for creating a world that seems "fair" to you without resorting to violence.
Indeed. Anyway, this guarded version shows the same behavior and, if I got everything right, cannot invoke undefined behavior for any values of p2:

#include <limits.h>

int N;
int fn5(int p1, int p2) {
int a = p2;
if (N && INT_MIN / 10.0 <= a && a <= INT_MAX / 10.0)
a *= 10.0;
return a;
}

GCC still does the multiplication as double, Clang still does it as int.

(And both evaluate the guards as int, so there.)
Why link it to land value, which could hurt retired people who own their homes but have fixed incomes? Wouldn't a better alternative be to tax corporate income and close loopholes that allow them to pretend they're Irish (or wherever) companies? Google and Apple could certainly afford to pay much more than homeowners.
That doesn't mean that that money is managed well, though.
The same trick the article uses works.
Prefixing records with their size sounds like how Messagepack works.
I dont know if something is a bubble or not. At some time in the future the value will be lower then now, is that in 1 year or 10 years, or never. Nobody knows that. That however had nothing to do with montary policy. If you want to crack down on the third class of buyers to protect the others from price volatility or other things that is something else that I dont have a opinion about.

Also, investment however flawed is simply not the same as a ponzi scheme.

Fundamentaly however you have to realise that low interest rates are not artefical. If the natural interst rate were as high as in 2006 with the rates we observe now we would see a massive collapse of the money supply and a recession worse then the great depression. Interest rate in the hole world have been going down since 1970. A recession itself depresses real rates, because investment is simple not as profitable.

The idea that the central bank can indepentenly fix housing bubbles and create stable demand is just flawed, its simply not possible. Its the wrong tool for the thing you want to fix.

The central bank could simple start buying and selling property instead of bonds, but that just replaces stability in one market with instability in another.
Just a warning, that second link goes to Narconon's site. Narconon is the Church of Scientology's organization for drug treatment. While this particular article seems reasonably factual, do not trust any advice given on that site, or use any phone number found there.
That's super interesting. I wonder if a vortex (a very very slow one) forms in the pitch in the upper container.
If you have a unix/linux stationary computer, just leave it on ...
Oh that's great that companies can make a greater profit, but higher prices mean that more people that need the help can't afford it. I really don't empathize with corporations here.
Goodbye Skype for Business, Hello….Teams
Well, yes, but it is randomness of a mistake - not randomness of the language.
If you are going to shoot yourself in the foot, I guess the wound would be pretty randomly located - but that is not the fault of the gun manufacturer.
At the end of the day this is a failing of the government (both State and Federal).

We have a Federal oil reserve. The government bears the cost of storing it (and in turn all taxpayers bear a small cost) so that when something happens and we need oil, we have it.

The state of Florida should have a bottled water and canned goods reserve. They (and their taxpayers) should bear the cost of storing those goods so they are available for a disaster.

Then there wouldn't be price gouging.

You could do the same with planes. They could store planes for times of emergency, or they could repurpose military transports or at the very least they could let the airlines set demand based prices and then subsidize people's purchases based on income and need, so that the airlines are incentivized to send more planes, but everyone can still get out.

If you believe that the government is the ultimate collective risk pool then it makes sense for it to act like one.
Yes economists have estimated that video games cause a 1.5 – 3.0% decline in labor hours by young men.

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/maguiar/fi...
How & why exactly are you unhappy with statistics?
"There are probably people that are needy and can't afford the increased prices."

I would imagine most people fall into this category during a crisis.

Access is "drowned out" for everyone ... equally. The alternative is that only the rich have access. Which is better? In both scenerios people die, except in one onnly one class of people die.

My point is there should be no "economic" model for private business in a natural disaster where lives are on the line.
Say we have two lines. One line for disaster charity contains water for free but you have to wait two hours and you only get two bottles per person per day. The other line with Joe Capitalist where you can get as much water as you want right now for $10 a bottle. Is there any problem with having both lines in a disaster?

I would say no, because it increases the total supply of water and allows those without wealth to get more since the people with wealth will spend it to get water from Joe Capitalist.
Depends on the outcome and how you measure efficiency.

Say there is a water shortage and lots of hoarding resulting in high profits and a couple of deaths.

Is that outcome more efficient than forced rationing resulting in less profit and less death?
Why should those who CAN afford to pay the higher prices be discriminated against by fixing prices and creating shortages so that it's first-come-first-serve instead of the supply being sold to the highest bidder?

Fixing supply only creates shortages, you can't repeal the laws of supply and demand.
The fact that a felony conviction makes such a strong impact on your ability to find a job, and even to vote, is unfortunate.
Raising prices economizes scarce resources. It ensures that one family doesn't buy all the water in the store for themselves, and that there is more for others. If it's an emergency then the high price is worth it. If the price is too high to be bought, the seller can't sell anything. The price finds an equilibrium which is useful, not harmful. If you want to help, send the victims money afterwards.
Yes, we can, but the argument is that the effects of higher prices are less severe than the effects of hoarding.
I'm finishing the book Dreamland, by Sam Quinones, which directly addresses your questions (with a particular focus on addiction in middle america/appalachia)

Q1: Medicaid co-pay for $1000 worth of OxyContin was (as of ~2014, might still be) on the order of $3-5. Those unable to get prescriptions fence stolen goods, primarily from rural WalMarts

Q2: Opiods are chemically similar to heroin. Addiction is severe and enslaving. Someone who wouldn't get off the couch to throw out the trash will walk miles in a snowstorm to get their fix.
So how do you reason with abundance of molecules? mRNA and protein can be modelled from simple linear differential equation
Automatic productionizability of PyTorch models through Caffe 2 will speed the transition from research to production dramatically - this gives the environment a chance to compete with Tensorflow / Tensorflow Serving.

Frameworks (say, DL4J) have been using Keras as a loose way to share models between frameworks. It'll be fascinating to see if Theano / Tensorflow / DL4J / MXNet walk this path as well.
“Asked to write a program that would send texts to customers, without assent”
Resources for getting started with distributed systems
Disney pulls movies from Netlix – Streaming fragmentation accelerates
Nitpick: it was Cobb County. But yeah the damage was done regardless, and now the county is left trying to find ways to pay for what it committed to, by increasing taxes and/or poaching money from other services like public schools.
Scientist: "difficult to interpret... I assume... This is a big leap... ideally I would have preferred... this calculation is at best considered illustrative... caveats aside..."

Reporter: "Opioid Use Explains 20% of Drop in American Men From Labor Force"
Several years ago, while I was at UT Austin, a guy from Google (Their Translate team? Sorry, I don't remember his name.) came and gave a talk on Voynich.

The punch line of one of his stories came while he was discussing the history of attempts to interpret it. One character had a dense theory that involved, as a step in the middle, involved the text being an anagram. The problem being that anagramming destroys information and, given a large enough text, is impossible to reverse. (Interestingly, this is why some 17th-18th century scientists who were obsessed with both secrecy and precedence published their results in anagram form---if someone later came along and published the same result, they could say, "See, I was first; here's what that gibberish means.")

My point being that if you're going to posit an "out-there" theory, you have to make sure your theory can get you back here.

For a short text, you may have a point, but for a text as large as the Voynich, information content is a pretty reasonable way to examine what's going on. The number of characters (as far as I know (http://www.voynich.nu/transcr.html)) is within the range of alphabetic writing. (Alphabets have <100 characters, syllabaries typically have a few hundred (Note: English has something like 5000 syllables.), and "morpho-syllabic" languages like Chinese (Thank you, John DeFrancis!) have a few thousand.)

To have more bits per character, the document would have to have more different characters. To pack more bits in via position, for example, would be possible, but you can't go crazy with the idea because you still need to be able to decrypt it. (Hangul is a neat example; it's alphabetic, but written with the letters arranged into blocks representing syllables. Neat!)
On the contrary, heightened prices can make hitherto-unprofitable supply chains feasible and bring more of the good to the market even during the period of inelastic shock.
The RFP says that sustainability is important. I would think Amazon would consider climate change as a factor. Miami and other South East coastal cities would be affected in the future by the increasing risk of flooding and hurricane winds.
Maybe programming is rocket science
Knowing how German government offices operate, the "software" for the final results is likely sending letters stamped with an official seal by post and calculating the result manually/with very low-tech software.
It probably means that the iPhone 7 can't output analoge signals via the Lightning port, so thre must be a DAC inside the 3.5-to-lightning adapter.
An even better question is "faster by what metric?". Once it has been running for a while and the JIT has done its work, it can definitely happen that a Java program will outperform an equivalent C++ program because of the JIT's improved knowledge of the whole program and the dynamic execution environment. C++ can gain much of the same benefit with LTO and PGO, but it's definitely not trivial (particularly PGO) and there's not really a slam dunk win for C++.

Now if the metric is startup time, that's a different story. (Though I believe there's been a lot of work on hybrid AOT/JIT since I left the world of managed languages, so maybe things are better now.)
FEMA might have been a joke during Katrina, but that doesn't mean we should simply blow it up and turn to the "free market". Fix FEMA or your government if they are dysfunctional.
It wasn't a joke. UTF-EBCDIC is a Unicode Technical Report:

http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr16/
When you offshore clothing production to a country where you can pay your employees $1/day, are you doing it because Americans are dumb and can't provide you with the skills you need? Which skills? The skill to survive in a homeless shelter?

Never mind that if every other business followed suit, they would destroy their customer base...
> I'm glad we're clear that your support for black civil rights doesn't go as far as supporting Martin Luther King.

Where did you get this from? Black-bloc refers to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc . If anything, my support is exactly for folks like MLK (and even Malcolm X) as opposed to the domestic terrorism of other groups at the time.

> And I'm also glad we're clear that you're prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to fascists.

As I also gave the benefit of doubt to communists!

> And that you think that a belief in fascism and white supremacy and a belief in Islam are appropriate things to compare.

Do you not follow world events? There is indeed a subset of Muslims who believe that non-Muslims are infidels and are fit to be killed or taken advantage of, much as there is a subset of whites who believe that non-whites are fit to be killed or taken advantage of. And some extremists of those subsets apparently use cars to kill gatherings of people. It's a pretty apt comparison.

> And there's a difference between defending freedom and hating it, but I think it's clear you already know that as well.

Well, yeah--defending freedom usually requires us to deal with real facts critically and to be able to engage with our opponents directly instead of putting words in their mouths.
Only the ones in the west. Most of the Prussian aristocrats who owned land in what became western Poland or the German Democratic Republic were disowned and fled/were killed.
If I was applying the expectations of the wrench kind of ownership, then I would be arguing that property taxes should not exist. That's not what I wrote in the comments above. In fact, I specifically articulated the reason why property taxes exist - to pay for the services of local government.

Instead, I am arguing that property taxes should change based on their reason for existence, funding the local government, and not be used as a tool to deprive people of the ownership of their property.

For example: A storm blows over a big tree, which severely damages the local elementary school. The school has been underperforming anyway so we need to hire new teachers and outfit the classrooms with better technology. All of this means the school needs more money. Local government officials decide that this may be funded by an increase on property tax. This is the reason that property taxes exist, so the argument to raise it here may be good, even if the value of my property hasn't changed.

As a different example: A big tech company comes to town and hires many thousands of workers. The high paid tech workers want houses in town, and the additional demand drives up house prices. Why should I pay more taxes? People with more money may want my house, and they are free to offer me their money. Using their demand for housing to justify asking me to pay more money or lose my property is unreasonable and unethical. This is what I'm arguing should not be done.
Who is stealing all the Bukowski and Kerouac novels?
> I don't see how it's defensible...

I'm trying to answer for the sake of debating - not necessarily my point of view.

First, regardless of how much the airline charges, there will be a fixed number of people that will get a seat.

Now, suppose the price is kept low, like $99. Maybe some people that don't want the seat that much will get it. They may have other options and wouldn't pay $200 for the seat, but think $99 is ok. Conversely, some people who value the seat much more (to the point they would pay $4000 for it) may not be able to get it. So you can argue that the seats will be attributed randomly, which is worse than basing the allocation on who wants the seats the most (well, then there's the issue that $5000 is peanuts for some people, and a lot for others, not sure how to answer to that).

Also, with the seats getting so expensive, the airlines may try to sell extra seats (re-routing planes for instance).

Finally, this happens all the time in different contexts. People go to all sorts of trouble because they don't have access to the best lawyers, doctors or can't afford their medication. It's not really an argument but if we are consistent, we shouldn't be shocked by one and not the other.
I do not consider Discord to belong in that space. it is aimed at gamers and not productivity at work

in that sense it is more like steam and xfire.

other than that I completely agree, but it still beats people coming over to your desk every few minutes and asking questions for which you need to stop your music and drop everything immediatly.
How Apple Finally Made Siri Sound More Human
My air pods/air buds/ whatever Apple calls them, they cut out a lot. Sometimes only one at a time, sometimes both. Sometimes they don't connect to the phone at all despite being fully charged.

My older plug in headphones with the adapter? Works every time.
Removing the headphone jack and putting a proprietary connector instead was a dick move, but the reason I don't buy Apple phones is because a phone costs almost as much as a Macbook Air. I think it's absurd to be this expensive, and I don't want to give Apple my money.
Could I Get the " Explain it like I am 5 TL;DR of this "
LOL. So you're saying a for-profit company, who's sole purpose is to increase revenue/stock value is going to do the right thing, and divert flights, leave their gouging money on the table, just to serve those in need? Don't hold you breath.
Ex Smoker of Cigarettes. and Abuser of prescription drugs.