skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And yet, here you are. :P

We all have our vices. And there's not as much of a difference between these various stimuli as you seem to think. It's more a question of degree than a qualitative difference. In addition to the things you mentioned, I also don't reminisce about the (few) long nights of work I've ever put in.

This line of thinking quickly leads to nihilism. Humans like doing things, and different humans like different things. Almost all possible human pursuits have some element addiction, because "addiction" is just a strong form of the way any behavior gets created and reinforced.

To put it another way, what do you "have" after an instance of birth-control-protected sex? It's as ephemeral as anything else on the list. I definitely do not reminisce about each instance of this that's happened in my life.
I disagree with some of below comments and it is totally Managment fault.

I might be somewhat a little rick. But in my case it is the managment responsibility to set the expectation.

If a task takes 5 days to complete but your manager says I need build at the end of day. You can not deny it and you have no other option but to patch.

Let's assume another scenario. If your manager says he needs
build at the end of day and you are spending 5 days to just write the beautiful thoughtful code than what will happen. You loose your creadibility and no one will trust you and say you are rockstar.

Then you will be fired like dumb.
Linux Kernel Community Enforcement Statement FAQ
Transposon display
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23918433
Go Facebook. Let's make the internet right the first time
Big Tech vs. Big Pharma: the battle over US patent protection
That's probably the most succinct way I've seen to articulate the Kid Effect. I'm going to steal that one!
20 MBTI Tumblr Posts That Are Pretty Spot on – Astroligion.com
You have 3206 karma on HN, that's not from a single post but rather a pattern of behavior.

Now, up-votes may not mean much on their own. But, it is a way of keeping score and there is a tendency to think of down-votes as a failure. From that standpoint it's easy to start thinking of up-votes as success and start to optimize for them.
> However, in a large enough context you can remove buildings and move roads etc.

Pittsburgh isn't flat, many times it is not "move this road." It's bore through this mountain, build this bridge, fix the drainage issues around this creek, etc. and fixing intersections almost always leads to more issues downstream.
>my fear was unfounded and we still had a lot of freedom to play and travel.

Be careful generalizing - this really depends on your life situations (including income/savings) and preferences.

For example, out of both our sets of parents there is only one (my MIL) that I'd ever want my hypothetical children to be around for any more than maybe an hour visit once a year, and she lives a 4 hour drive away. So there is pretty much zero family support for childrearing for us, which is a big factor in our choice to avoid childbearing.

I feel I have to preemptively defend my choice to keep my hypothetical children from their hypothetical grandparents - they are domestic emotional and physical abusers, substance abusers, mentally ill, reckless and drunk drivers, conflict seekers, emotionally unstable, behave socially inappropriately, don't respect boundaries, and create a toxic environment to be in. I grew up with that shit - I would only subject my worst enemy to it.
Supposing it's not a common naval code, it's strange enough behavior that the captain would think it must mean something, and "follow me" is the best intuitive interpretation I can see, though by no means obvious.
Weren't they also embedded in the Clinton campaign? As well as the Obama and Romney campaigns in 2012?
I'm surprised that HMOs haven't become more of a thing. I.e., systems where the insurance and care are combined in one private system. It seems like HMOs should be politically acceptable to all sides, and are akin to a privatized single payer system. HMOs would seem to address the pricing issue.
What Hackernews cares about in an ideal job
Did you bother reading what he said? Speed limits are lower than what is safe on many roads. Limits should be increased to the safe maximum and then the maximum should be more strictly enforced. Minimums should be enforced as well, since driving significantly below the maximum is also unsafe.

It doesn't mean increasing limits to something that is unsafe.
What do you need a clearance for? Ideally, you are trying to get higher systems level information about security threats, balance points, environmental factors, groups that have been identified... If you have no use for the higher level information in your field then why even go for one? It's a stressful thing to keep, it's a really heavy responsibility, the consequences of betraying the clearance are devastating, and the whole point is that precious information is compartmentalized.
do the test, but dont get married to the results. every test, even those done best, are evidence in the decision making process, not proof.
Ditto with electric tech. You can buy an electric VW right now, and from reviews I've read it's apparently a fantastic product. The difference is in hype. VW very boringly made their existing dependable and well known Golf electric.
If something is "from chapter 1 of a Statistics 101 textbook", then maybe you would communicate better by thinking that perhaps whomever you're talking to also understands it, and is actually making a different argument.

Specifically, your simplistic multiplication does not address what I said - your original argument implies that if killing someone is easier with a sharp blade, then I should be more willing to attack someone as it becomes cheaper for me to satisfy this unexplained demand for murder.
I've grappled with this problem multiple times in data-vis programming.

A related problem is, once you have a uniform color space, how do you color code a list of things such that:

A) Color are maximally distinguishable from each other, i.e. maximally separated on the color wheel.

B) Colors are stable as items are added and removed, to avoid confusion caused by the color for an item shifting as you update the display.

The two criteria are at odds, unfortunately. The compromise I came up used PHI, since it's essentially a radial distribution problem, which PHI excels at. Something like:

(PHI * idx * 360) % 360
The biggest change for me has been partitioning. When it is time to work, I work. No distractions, attack the most important tasks etc. During breaks I will let my attention wander but not during work periods.

When I am participating in hobbies, with friends, on vacation, done for the day etc I do not work. I will not check my email, I will not answer phone calls, I will not do any work. Obviously if there is an emergency I will break this policy, but true emergencies are pretty rare. I schedule both work time and time off in my calendar and make it available for people I work with to see. They know that unless it's an emergency, if they contact me during a marked time off they will not get a response until the next work period.
Linux faces a Munich crisis
Could you please explain further how Medicare benefits from the lack of price transparency?
...but is it better? :)
> was when I realized each year of grad school cost me 100k+. Opportunity costs.

Money aside, the biggest opportunity cost of education is time. Looking back on my undergrad, I spent an extra year trying to edge out a BS degree when everyone around me was telling me to take the BA in CS and settle for that. In the moment, I felt that the BA would hinder my job prospects. Now that I've been out for a year and a half, I realize that I kind of wasted a year in terms of time. I probably would have been in the exact same place I am now if I had just decided to graduate with what I had at the time.

And, to add further, I ended up earning a BA anyways. But that's another rant.
Yeah my first thought was that space isn't quite a vacuum, which maybe adds up over 130M light years to something measurable. Meanwhile, the gravitational wave is a fluctuation in space itself, so always moves at SoL?

The sibling comment about one simply happening after another also seems very plausible though.
Bravo. However, many of the threats we see today are brand new, expertise where everyone starts with 0 may be where we find ourselves for new threats.
Basically there are the 'rules' and there is 'how people drive'. As I recall Flocking behavior is largely group consensus driven, where members that disrupt the flock are penalized, ones that conform move at the flock rate, and small optimizations propagate by example.

I would expect lines of self driving cars along the right lane of the freeway driving at the speed limit while the non-autonomous drivers speed by them on the left. Merging into that would look scary but would be fairly straight forward as the robot cars would always yield rather than collide.

Going to be interesting to see how this evolves out in practice.
It is no mystery that FB is a company founded in the US. Why try and pander to everyone when the cultural outflow is so clearly originating from the stateside?
Worth noting that this is a quote from the game Deus Ex and the 2% is relevant to the game's fictional universe set in 2052. It's meant to be more of a vision of a dark future at the given trend not necessarily a number to be used in the year 2000 when the game released.
Sadly they don't care and the traffic is really bad when america is waking up here... (Paris, France)

~100kb/s for cloning large projects is killing me sometimes
Big Tech vs. Big Pharma
Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises.
I believe the caveat here is that once either particle is observed, both are "constantized" into their final states (and manual changes to either no longer affects the other). For example, until you look at your coin, it could either be heads or tails (and your friend's coin could also be tails or heads). Once you look at it and see that it's heads, it'll forever be heads -- and your friend's coin will forever be tails, regardless of whether they look at their coin when it arrives.

The opposite is true: if you don't look at your coin and your friend does, then tells you his coin is tails, you can know your coin is heads. You can't change it to be tails and tell your friend he must've seen wrong -- his is still tails and yours is still heads.

Obviously that's a super-simplified version (because I don't understand it all myself), but the gist is: once either entangled particle is observed, the bond between the two is broken and any manual modification of your coin (like flipping it over manually) no longer has any effect on your friend's coin, or vice versa.
Haha "I was thinking about applying for a security clearance..." and the reply is "yes we know ... "
> I'm not a healthcare expert, but my understanding is that Medicare does address the cost transparency issue. Services simple cost what the government says they cost.

Medicare is the root of price opacity in the medical system. Medicare determines prices by fiat, with no mandate to ensure that the rates are sustainable. As a result, Medicare's reimbursement rates are about 7% less than COGS in the aggregate. In other words, even if hospitals cost nothing to run and everyone worked for free, they would still lose 7% on each Medicare patient (on average) in purchasing the supplies necessary to treat them.

How is that the providers still manage to stay in business? By marking up prices for private insurers (and therefore uninsured patients too, whom they are required by law to present the same price at the initial bill). Private insurers end up negotiating this down to some multiple of what Medicare reimburses, and this entire process is why there's no feasible way to have a transparent pricing system. It all depends on what the mixture of private-to-public insurance is for the patients that the provider sees, because they need to charge enough to make up for the loss that they're taking on Medicare patients.

The fact that Medicare reimburses below-COGS isn't a secret; Medicare itself even has not one but two separate programs to subsidize providers who see a "disproportionate" number of Medicare patients. In other words, they're pretty open about the fact that private insurance is subsidizing the cost of care for Medicare patients, preventing any possibility of price transparency.
> how did this attack slip through, despite the fact that the 802.11i handshake was formally proven secure?

So, we cannot trust even formal verification?

> it’s a factual statement. In formal analysis, definitions really, really matter!

If lack of definition implies flaws in formal verification, does that mean we need an additional formal verification of formal verification?

Update:

> We need machine-assisted verification of protocols, preferably tied to the actual source code that implements them.

Haskell, here is your opportunity :-)
You don't think Facebook provides value worth paying money for? They wouldn't have to charge premium members (assuming they could convert enough free users) much to match their ad revenue... They have over 2 billion users, at least a handful which you have to imagine would be willing to pay to socialize with privacy from external corporate entities. I understand why they had to make it free to get to this point, but they've got almost 7x the population of the United States as daily active users now. If they could convert 10% of their user base to pay $9.99/month, that's $24B a year... A decent start seemingly, and I can imagine there are many ways to further monetize those users with other services.
If you don't mind me asking: What kind of doctor did you see? What do you say when you want to make an appointment?

Lately I've been wanting to talk to a doctor, but I get very hung up on who I need to see and how to kick off the conversation about how I've been feeling.
>Price transparency is the number 1 hurdle facing American healthcare. How are you supposed to fix a cost problem if you don't know what anything costs? Worse yet, how can there be a market for a service if there are no prices??? Less than 10% of healthcare expenditures are emergencies, that leaves a lot of room for shopping around.

Price transparency is a band-aid on the real problem: we've corrupted the market with EMTLA. Since hospitals can't turn you away other people have to pick up that tab. Maybe what we should be asking ourselves is why we want healthcare to be a market at all? We have the capability to remove wealth from the equation of health entirely so why not?
No, Facebook offered their services to the Clinton campaign and they Clinton campaign rejected the offer. It's actually in the 60 minutes piece referenced in the link which is viewable online.
Malta car bomb kills Panama Papers journalist
The simplest things are not contextualized. The methods are sold like aspirin for any pain point. We confuse methods with instant "solutions." The best salad recipes fail of unripe or overripe ingredients. We might better contextualize method with case examples sharing some measurable comparative formalisms. Then we confuse project execution success with market penetration or buyout acquihire payday dreams.

Close attention and years of reading are important to writing code worth writing. I read literature oriented around "skunkworks" sized teams and applied them at somewhat similar scales. The better literature is fantastic. But the literature presumes too much of readers and means little outside operative exposure to multiple successful applications. Folks seeking method for quick home runs are barking up the wrong trees from the beginning.
People are harshly punished for the Pittsburgh Left, it's just that the punishment is somewhat random and handed out by physics rather than lawmen.
It's in the context of the previous comments, "X person robbing Y person". I didn't want to be redundant. No matter what crimes are happening, there are no police involved, so there is no police transparency motive to release the video.
For me, buying a house wasn't so much about house values going up, as rents started going up faster than mortgages in my area. That's why I finally bought.

That said, I might have bought sooner had I realized the mind shift that happens with ownership. Want to do something about storage space? Drop a grand at ikea and put in semi permanent shelving. I would never think about dropping that kind if money on a rental.
IMO the lack of price transparency is deliberate - it aids in price discrimination, AKA charging customers individually based on what they're capable of paying depending on their assets and insurance. Price discrimination in normal goods is limited by willingness to pay, while healthcare is degenerate in this sense because willingness is essentially infinite.
The inevitable "negativity" should be seen as addressed to the HN community (for somehow upvoting this irrelevant submission to the front page) + the submitter (for the misleading clickbatish title).

It does not reflect on your motives, writing style, or whatever.
30 years ago, almost the same day, a hurricane category 2 on the Saffir-Simpson scale reached France and the British Isles : http://tempetes.meteofrance.fr/L-ouragan-du-15-au-16-octobre... (in French).

Edit: fixed the quotation on the Saphir Simpson scale that was incorrectly taken from the article.
Underline seems like a perfectly sensible thing to me. I've run into problems like his "same Γ, different x and τ" example many times. In PLT Redex, I have to either make sure the thing I intend to be non-subscripted is already bound elsewhere or make an after-the-fact check that all of the subscripted versions of it are equal. Both options are awkward, and which one I have to do varies by situation. An `unsequence' notation to complement the `sequence' notation (which is actually done in Redex by appending an ellipsis) would let me directly say what I mean. The OCR issue is strictly an aspect of the marks put on the page rather than the ideas they describe, and a completely serial notation could be used as well (similar to backtick and comma for quasiquotation).
Yes, absolutely. This wasn't a very large gamma ray burst - as far as I know it may have not been followed up at all. GRBs are hard to localize - but the detection of the gravitational wave made it possible to search for the source quickly in a much smaller area of the sky. This got a lot of people looking, and a lot of good data collected.
And then the kid goes on to write an essay about how good he was for finally putting down the dirty beast.
The paper I linked to explains the drawbacks to such a design.
Formal verification all the way down.

I'm a complete layman in this field, but mustn't it bump against the Incompleteness Theorem at some point? There's no way to prove your definitions.
I moved my phone away from my person when charging it at night. I’ll, without fail, spend an hour on it doing bullshit before going to bed if I don’t.
This is my tactic as well. If I can't trust them to know they have the right of way and use it, then I won't trust them enough to put myself in front of their vehicle. That goes for driving as well as walking.
Your iPad’s front camera is now a button with Astro’s Luna Display
Dear Men, This Is Why We’re Tired
WPA2 shown to be vulnerable to key reinstallation attacks
Do you have any photos/videos of the panels while moving?

All the items are "out od stock", why?

Any benchmark to show the 40% improvement?

I'm worried that moving parts break. How long are these expected to last without maintenance?
So, was there a telescope monitoring the light location already, or was the light only found after the Gr detection... I.e. Was it not truly concurrent?
Great article. Is similar to what we witnessed during our fundraising process.

I want to apply for Atrium Academy - but our company is based out of India - are we eligible for the academy?
In lots of places, pedestrians still have the right of way over you. Please don't ignore that they exist.
That still doesn't remotely match the way I see people drive.
Your belief is equivalent to a “hidden variable” theory, that the coins have some property stored in them that ensures the outcome is predetermined.

Unfortunately, while that theory is very intuitive, it’s also been conclusively proven wrong through statistical methods.

Instead of a 50:50 chance of landing between two states, it’s actually closer to throwing three pairs of entangled coins at your friend and into the air, but both of you only having the dexterity to catch one. Any remaining coins scatter on the ground and in doing so lose their entanglement. For the sake of identification, let’s say all three pairs of entangled coins are different colors. You choose to both catch coins of the same color, and you see that they show opposite sides 100% of the time. Great! The analogy still holds.

Here’s the problem. Now you start just catching a random coin from each set of three and collecting the results. You do this many times. Let’s assume there’s a hidden variable. In each set of coin throws, there are eight possible predetermined outcomes. Two of these outcomes are that one of you catches a coin from a set predetermined to be TTT while the other catches a coin predetermined to be one of HHH. The other six outcomes are equivalent to one of you catching from a set of TTH and the other catching one of HHT. There are no other possible sets of hidden outcomes.

In the first two instances, you are 100% guaranteed to get a matching Heads/Tails pair by catching coins at random. In the remaining six, the two of you will record a matching pair 5/9 of the time (2/3 of the time you have 2/3 chance of a match, 1/3 of the time you have 1/3 chance of a match).

This means that well over 50% of the time you will catch matching pairs of coins. This is an inescapable consequence of any hidden variable theory. However, in practice, it turns out you have matching pairs exactly 50% of the time. There’s no getting around this. You perform the experiment hundreds of thousands of times, and your long term average is 50%. Given the above probabilities, there is no possible way for there to be a hidden variable predetermining the outcome. As far as we can tell, the only thing that explains the 50% rate of matching HT pairs is that at the moment a coin is caught and observed, they both spontaneously choose opposite sides to display.
I was on the barren craggy side of Aruba with my wife standing on this sheer “cliff” about 15 feet above the ocean watching these big waves roll in.

All of a sudden a wave about 20 feet appeared out of nowhere and almost swept us off the cliff.

I was recording a video of the waves. We looked back at the video later and you hear me go “oh shit”, pick up my wife, and run just to get pummeled by this thing from behind with water splashing over us. We got pretty far from the cliff and I’m not positive how much of it was running verse being pushed.

The end of the video is us soaked cracking up with broken flips flops and me saying “my phone got wet”. We absolutely don’t remember any of it. It was pure adrenaline the second we saw the wave.
Is it me or do other people agree that Slate's headlines just keep getting more clickbaity?
"fired" is a very negative word, but the point is there needs to be a break between company and employee. As someone who was fired for cause in a situation like this, it's the best thing that ever happened to me. The ship was on fire and sinking fast, and I was totally burned out, bailing as fast as I could. Requested my vacation time once we shipped(nearly on schedule) & got fired instead. Felt awful at the time and I was totally bitter, but looking back it was a godsend. 5 weeks later I had a new job, a vacation, and a huge raise. Now I can't imagine why I spent so long there doing miserable work with old dead end tech, crazy overtime, and all for a pittance. Yea it would have been nice to leave on my terms but the important thing was leaving, regardless of fault or method
oh yea commonwealth!