skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Freeways divide neighborhoods; we can't plop them down everywhere, and definitely not in this situation. It takes a massive amount of room to move vehicles at a rapid rate, and it discourages pedestrian-friendly, dense land use

Neither of these are necessarily true. Urban Freeways are better at connecting neighborhoods than arterial streets are, because the freeway is off grade (either way above, or way below pedestrians), and therefore there is nothing present to 'divide' anything. Pedestrians and bicycles can freely move around anytime without any waiting for anything and with 100% safety at all times.

Additionally, since freeways capacities are so much higher, they encourage high density land use, since they can support so much more transportation of people. That encouragement doesn't guarantee high density will happen, builders preferences and peoples budgets will still dictate cheap single family houses most of the time regardless. But that's not something the freeway itself influences. (In the same way that a train station encourages high density, but many are still in suburban areas anyway).

The only real drawback is price. Ugly, space-wasting rural freeways at ground level are much cheaper. But they are worse for drivers and pedestrians, every bit as bad as what we see here for everyone.

> Nobody really likes living next to it, either: there's measurably worse air pollution and much higher noise.

The air pollution and noise is mostly unchanged (same exact cars making the same trips). And Electric Cars already fully solved both of these problems anyway, it's just a matter of time as gasoline vehicles get phased out.

It looks like their current solution to the crosswalk is to add a stoplight to it. Which ironically will actually increase air pollution, as previously-traveling cars will now often sit idling, right next to two schools...
There is a big middle ground between suburban ranch homes on 0.25 acres and "Manhattan", see some nice areas of dense row (aka. townhouses) houses in London suburbs.
I have travelled in London for 5 years and it is anything but predictable. My commute of 45 minutes would last anywhere between 45 minutes to two hours depending upon the excuses they will cookup. Sometimes my train travel will be converted to a nice picnic on London bus as train will be cancelled abruptly. Their list of excuses is legendary[1].

And then comes these patronising messages "This [Chrismas|Easter|Weekend|Holiday] I am working for you." I saw those messages for 5 years and still saw services going downhill.

One funny anecdote probably illustrates their lethargy. Station I used to board from was upgraded and platform extended to allow boarding from 10 carriages. This happened long before I started living their.
But announcement always said only 9 carriages will open. I lived their for two years and same message was played everyday.

[1] https://www.standard.co.uk/news/a-year-of-excuses-to-rail-ag...
[2] https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/check-before-y...
Your chances of being murdered in the US are not evenly distributed. I grew up in a ghetto (for example a young man was murdered across the street from my childhood home, with a blunt object when I was about 8.)

I live in a suburb now and heart disease is more likely to kill me than a gun.
Thanks. Just played it... It does look artistic but there are too many missing playable elements. Things only interact in certain way and exploration involves only few free actions. I guess I'm too spoiled by games like Monument Valley to appreciate it.
Hey, a relevant article to me. I ride the metrolink from the same station she used to ride from. I have a 35 minute drive to the Riverside metrolink, and I take it down to Orange, another 55 minutes. This is about to expand to 1 hour and 15 minutes when my work moves its office to Irvine.

My typical day, I wake up at 4am, drive to Riverside to do some crossfit from 5:30-6:30, and hop on the train at 7am. I get to the office shortly after 8am. Fortunately, I leave around 4pm and am usually home by 6pm. I tend to work on the train, but I can use that for side projects or leisure when I feel like it.

After 5 years of doing that, I shifted to working in the office usually 3 days a week, and then remote the last two days of the week. It really has helped.

Why do I do it? I really love where I work. It is fantastic. I also really love where I live in the mountains of SoCal. My coworkers have a hard time wrapping their head around dealing with wildlife like bears and things like ice and snow in the winter :). Many also can't process that my mortgage is under half of what they spend on an apartment (that they split with a roommate). My wife is a part time crossfit coach and full time mother, doing home school with our two youngest kids.

I've thought about moving close to work, but housing is just so expensive there. Counting commute costs, I would have to spend 4x on a mortgage in the city. I would like to do things like save money for my future and eat healthy foods. So I stay where I'm at. And I'm happy.
I just keep a sticker with a date on the cans and then occasionally pour a 5 gallon can into my truck and re fill it.
gopher://
This is bullshit. A street designer has one job, to make the street good for driving. It is pedestrians responsibility to look and cross safely. It is driver's responsibility to not hit people who may have strayed onto the street. It is the car's responsibility to detect a human and apply the brakes automatically. It seems only the street designer did his job properly.
Just today I was trying to find some earphones on amazon and came across following seller page.

https://www.amazon.ca/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dap...

Almost all of their products have 500-600 reviews and all are 5 star, not even a single one is less than 5 stars. Moreover, most of reviews are created in November 2017 and each reviewer has left couple of 5-star reviews only for same seller's product within a week.

These fake reviews could have been detected by even a basic detection system. Not sure why Amazon has not already detected and removed them.
We have monero, no thank you.
They did their jobs. They got a pay rise.
At a high level the needle hasn't moved much. But even little movements do add up. I'd rather not go back to a web before fuzz testing, fewer accessibility standards, and password managers. Not to mention AOL and its kind dividing the world into disconnected, walled gardens.
Donating to under-served communities that are using the computer for the first time. They can derive a lot of value out of the old machines like learning to type, basic internet usage etc.
Has anyone made a blocklist for sites with these scripts yet?
REST has the same problem as object oriented programming. It's too skeuomorphic. Lots of web applications are wrappers around conceptually monolithic resources, so it's convenient to use a protocol that makes that assumption. But as soon as you need to nest resources, or perform some action that has nothing to do with CRUD, or do just about anything interesting, the metaphor begins to fall apart.

(That's also why OOP has all these "patterns." Many are just attempts to cope with the "object" metaphor falling apart. "Is" an AttackingRock a Monster, or "is" it an Obstacle? Hmm...)
Agreed. I hate this trend of trying to mellow everything down to some harmless palatable cause. People rape because they are worthless scum who don't think about their victim's wellbeing. People murder because they don't value their victim's life. I don't need to justify their fucked up behaviour using some humane analysis of their psyche. Just lock them up and throw away the key.
Thank you. This is one that I've been puzzling over for years. If anyone has a straightforward answer, and can provide example REST responses with and without "HATEOAS", I'd really appreciate it.
I mean, I'm just suspicious. Fakespot seems to say the reviews are dishonest, fake, overly positive for.. well, a lot of things, including my favorite pair of headphones.

They're positive because the headphones are utterly fantastic. They beat the crap out of the better-reviewed (on Amazon) Bose version. Which Fakespot gives a better grade to.
> if the tradeoff you are suggesting is dead kids versus "impossible to drive on, war on cars"

It never was. The suggestion is "don't put kids in the few areas of the city specifically marked as dangerous".

It's like building a school inside of a river, watching kids drown, and suggesting the water is at fault and should get out of the way. Or building a school on an airport runway and complaining the noise scares the children and suggesting the airplanes are at fault and should land elsewhere.
Your question sort of implies that this happened accidentally, against the interests of progressives, but what you're describing is the foundation of intersectionality, which holds that intersecting group identities are primary and paramount for understanding systems of oppression.

In other words, this is thought of as a feature, not a bug.
Have you read a bunch of literature online about these topics?

I feel like there are many, many, pro-second amendment groups, not just the NRA, and perhaps that could shed a little light on it.

I'm willing to bet there are many reasons.

Off the top of my head:

- An organism has the basic instinct and right of self preservation. Police generally focus catching criminals after they've committed a crime. So if you want the freedom to protect your basic right to survive and defend yourself, a gun equalizes your chances with potential attackers. You don't have to be young and strong, just well versed in using the weapon and in possession of it.

- The ability of the population to make things difficult for the government to institute total martial law is a basic check on wholesale removal of civil rights or due process. People seem to think militias in the mountains of Kentucky would be completely ineffectual in this regard but fail to notice how the Taliban has been very effective for decades in Afghanistan.

Etc.

This really isn't a topic that I am expert in but there has to be more reasons if you look for them.
I would recommend a document known as The declaration of independence. It is quite short and does a decent job explaining the reasoning.
I’d love to agree with you, but unfortunately as humans we are not infallible. We cannot rely on people to look in every direction and see every hazard constantly. The driver may have been distracted, for example by sun strike, and the pedestrian may have not seen the car due to its colour.

Roads need to be designed for their purpose, and their purpose also includes allowing pedestrians to cross safely even if the pedestrian and the driver suffer from a momentary distraction.
Yes. Specifically, the common argument has become that flat minima generalize well.

As for the last part, when people talk about overfitting we're typically ignoring distributional shift. Otherwise, models can achieve very good generalization.
Paying off the mortgages would have been another bailout, just more diffuse from what we saw.

And while the existing bailouts incentivized banks to misbehave, paying off mortgages would have incentivized a generation (or two?) to misbehave.. and also further screwed the people who did play by the rules.

Of those two scenarios, I prefer the bank bailout.
>Shouldn't we consider it a giant, massive red flag that you need a corporation backing you to maintain one of the most critical pieces of web software?

That's the price of doing business, isn't it? It's why communism doesn't pan out as well as capitalism. What's that a red flag against? The human animal?

I agree--let's replace 'em with super AI instead or something, but, in the interim...

>we need to live in an ecosystem where making our own platforms is easy enough that you can have 10-20 viable options simultaneously supported. Linux distros are a fantastic example of this.

They are not. Pale Moon is about as "viable" against Firefox or Chrome as Ubuntu or Mint are "viable" against Windows or MacOS for the average user. (And one of those [the better, much more popular one] has a corporation backing it!)
It’s interesting that the focus is on the gun and not the situation: club, drugs, (alcohol?)

In most states it’s illegal to carry a gun and drink, etc. Chances are the gun was acquired illegally, possessed illegally,etc. How do more gun control laws help here?

Maybe your European friend forgot what happened in Paris a couple of years ago in a country with strict gun control laws. Gun control laws provide a false sense of security. Since you can’t put the genie back in the bottle, no gun control laws will achieve “gun safety” that people seek.
My grandmother's sister was married to a man who served as Captain of the 1st rank on a nuclear submarine in the Soviet and maybe even Russian Navy (I don't know exactly when he retired). As I found out later in life, he was also one of the liquidators of Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the effects of which ultimately led to his early death in early 2000s. I know for sure he already retired from military by mid 90s when I was about 10 or 11. Right around that time, me and my pops used to visit them in Moscow on just about every summer break and I remember during one of our stays with his family my dad asked him about this particular subject. His response is something I still remember word-for-word which would translate roughly to "We know they exist. There are people (in the government) working on this. I don't know anything more and this is all i can tell you." I'm not trying to make any conclusions here or get ridiculed. Just sharing something that came from a man who must've had a pretty high clearance in Soviet military. Or maybe he was just trolling us lol
Google Thinks I'm Dead
That is called learning and is indeed a creative process.
This appears to not have been about money[0]. It was supposed to be an easter egg written by some folks at FireFox who were fans of Mr. Robot. It wasn't supposed to be the bomb that it turned out to be. Shame, really.

[0] https://www.metafilter.com/171227/Your-Reality-Is-Driven-By-...
THESE ARE THE BEST 11 SMARTPHONES RELEASED IN 2017
we are slowly working towards this goal[0], we try to team up with other projects and develop this stuff cooperatively. our focus is on the user and developer experience side of things. creating good comfy tools for developers and fighting for very high quality UX on the user side.

[0]: https://heropunch.io
Depending on the (edit handgun) caliber it could bring you to the ground even with adrenaline flowing. You will end up with large bruises for sure. If there is a rifle involved >.22 caliber, then you will likely face penetration unless you have a trauma plate. Body extremities really can't be effectively protected.
I did read the article, honest! But I missed that.
I love it when people try to explain our legal system to attorneys.
With great difficulty.

Most major brands never even touch their products. They design them and have them built by contract manufacturers. They then get sent through distributors, shippers, brokers, etc. Each of which has terribly old systems which may or may not track each individual item.

Most links in this chain are also disinterested in any third party knowing what and how many products they move, including and especially the brand itself.
To self-doubting developers: are you good enough?
Both situations should require full disclosure, otherwise I don't see anything wrong with the F grade assessment.
It's actually more harmful. This sort of prejudice is harboured and acted upon by a lot more people than rapists, simply because there are no repercussions. So collectively, humanity suffers a lot more. Of course if you compare a single person's discomfort to the horror a rape victim goes through... Well you cannot compare.
I wish it we're this simple, but after working in this space I can tell you that getting that data is a Herculean task.
We mark areas as "dangerous" and thats it? A kid is dead, but really, its noones fault?

I'm afraid your thinking on this is roughly 60 years behind. Of course vehicular deaths are not "natural".
"I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

"I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes."

"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."

- Winston S Churchill
57 user on OpenBSD here. No extension installed (at least to my knowledge ;)), no crash to report. It has been a pretty smooth experience so far.
He's being more generous than he needs to be. It is off by default.
> Chances are the gun was acquired illegally, possessed illegally,etc. How do more gun control laws help here?

You can't illegally acquire guns when there are no guns to acquire. There's a reason why muggers in Paris or Tokyo don't shoot people, and the reason is not because they are nice muggers.

And "you can't put the genie back in the bottle" is kind of the opposite of "gun control laws are slippery slope toward total dictatorship" (which a lot of people seem to believe). You cannot claim both at the same time.
He was also definitely not a good poster child for democracy, given his passion for colonialism.
For those that want to donate: https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/
I don't understand, what does that matter to safe engineering?
From the article:

"A 2009 Pentagon briefing summary of the program prepared by its director at the time asserted that “what was considered science fiction is now science fact,” and that the United States was incapable of defending itself against some of the technologies discovered"

Wait, what? What are the "technologies discovered"?
Ask HN: Is there value in being a generalist?
TL;DR: Are generalists valuable to a startup? If so, any tips on getting a job?

As for the long of it: I love learning new things. I became an attorney based on a completely delusional assumption that as an attorney I'll have a lifelong career of learning new and novel things, and applying them to my craft. Of course after actually practicing for a few years I realized that a) I hate the law, and b) no one in the professions actually want's you to learn anything new. It's all about specialization and then endless repetition.

For a while after quitting my law practice I worked at a startup where I was basically in charge of operations, coding, writing copy, doing design work, "putting out fires," and generally doing anything we didn't have a dedicated person to do. I loved that. After that company dissolved for various personal and market reasons, I moved to the desert, off the grid, and worked on a bunch of small personal projects for a few years.

Now I am ready to rejoin civilization, and would love to get another "generalist" job, but it's not like there are job listings for that sort of thing. So I guess my question is, is a generalist person valuable in a startup? If so, any recommendations for finding a company to join? Or should I just give up, specialize in something, and go with the flow? :)

Thanks for any recomendations!
If the economic system could speak, which it cannot, a crisis would be it saying 'hold on! we're giving scarce resources to people who are not using productively'.

Now there are really only two ways this can play out:
1) Organically, whoever was making the (economically) poor decisions is removed from the system by virtue of going broke.
2) The government steps in and the taxpayer settles debts.

Once you enter (2) territory, which is what the US did in the '07 crisis, it really doesn't matter who you give the money to. You are still going to have economic mismanagement. It will continue unless it somehow gets so catastrophic that not even the government can settle it.

Now, the US government is pretty powerful, so maybe that day will never come. But if they are going to get involved at all, why into give the money directly to the little people? They are already throwing out the principles of good economic management.
This argument is so old. I’d guess you’ve never been trained to or handled a firearm. I suggest you learn about it and understand that it’s a tool like any other. “But it’s primary purpose is to kill!!!” Sure, and the primary purpose of alcohol is not to kill people, yet it causes as many deaths per year as gun-homicide.

I understand, you don’t like guns, and that’s ok, nobody’s forcing you to acquire or use one, but taking away that option for law-abiding Folks doesn’t make any of us safer.
First of all, violence is not Anarchism. The essence of Anarchy is non-violence. Google voluntaryism.

So yes, of course real anarchists identify as libertarians, anarchism is the embodiment of libertarian philosophy, especially the non-aggression principal. (NAP)
This.

I like my niche obscure anti marketing parasite browsers. But I am well aware there's a lot of Mozilla code in Waterfox and Pale Moon.

And ultimately its MS, Mozilla and Google who run this show. And out of those Mozilla is still the least bad.
This doesn't improve your argument.
I'm not really arguing anything. As I said, I see no answer so I certainly don't have any side. I'm discussing homelessness more than poverty, though. The issues which leave one homeless and those which leave one in poverty, but still living under your own roof, are quite different. The former has a strong link to addiction and other such issues, not so much in the former.
See the 'Richardson Maturity Model' levels [1], and contrast level 2 with 3. Level 3, satisfying the HATEOAS constraint, has hyperlinks leading to other resources, and the relationship between the origin and destination resource is qualified (with link relations [2]).

Essentially, everything is a graph, resources are the nodes, and the labels on edges are the relations, also serving as an inventory of state transitions.

The "HATEOAS debate" is the trope that says people will inevitably debate whether a particular API that claims to adhere to REST does in fact adhere to REST, because many APIs that namedrop REST don't satisfy the HATEOAS constraint. This is rarely a practical debate, but the fact that it keeps coming up -- and people take the time to explain -- is part of the problem with REST. This was the author's point.

[1] https://martinfowler.com/articles/richardsonMaturityModel.ht... [2] https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relatio...
Less congestion at superchargers == more value.
> Urban Freeways are better at connecting neighborhoods than arterial streets are, because the freeway is off grade (either way above, or way below pedestrians), and therefore there is nothing present to 'divide' anything. Pedestrians and bicycles can freely move around anytime without any waiting for anything and with 100% safety at all times.

Can you show an example? 280 in San Francisco comes to mind. The division is the underpass or the overpass, and the frontage roads required to support it. Any big grade change and long distance between buildings suppresses non-car use. It's not limited to freeways, either -- you can achieve a similar effect with grade-separated railways.
It depends on how far away, and what you were shot with... vests are designed to block hand guns, not rifels. It may not stop every bullet. A larger hand gun, say 50cal, has more recoil and is harder to aim with sequential shots, thus not practical... but feels amazing and is so loud!

I believe it would take a person down and possibly kill them. I've been told police are taught 2 to the chest 1 to the head.

From my quick googling, a great read:
"...Among the accounts from those who have experienced being shot while wearing a bulletproof vest (and lived to talk about it), there is one consistent analogy to describe the feeling: being hit with a baseball bat. ..."
http://www.ponderweasel.com/shot-wearing-a-bulletproof-vest/
Think!
Techies Still Think They're the Good Guys. They're Not
Pentagon’s UFO program revealed