skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But there are muslims who don't hate gay people or who find their relationship to islam to have nothing to do with gay rights. I'm not sure you will find many liberals who are hunky dory with muslims who hate gay people, but instead they will say that it is not okay to hate a muslim person when you don't know their personal stance on things like gay marriage.
In legal terms, illegal and unlawful are not synonymous. In the UK, trespass is only illegal in certain circumstances: https://cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/trespass-and-nuisance-land

Beyond that, it's only unlawful.
Maybe because SV, at least from my outside SV vantage point, projects itself as working on life changing, world altering, every day simplifying products. From their ignorance of life outside SV, their self image is arrogant.
If I tell my Libertarian friends that income and wealth inequality is bad for the economy because it reduces consumer spending and bad for society because it radicalized those at the bottom. And then explain that it should be solved with wealth redistribution in the form of progressive taxation and estate taxes they get similarly upset. This is hardly a problem unique to liberals.
If you're interested in translation, you may want to check out Why Translation Matters by Grossman, who translated Love in the Time of Cholera among other things. I hadn't thought of translation as anything other than utilitarian and found Grossman's book enlightening. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300171303/why-translatio...
Show HN: Intro to x86 Assembly Language [video]
That's sophomoric, and I'm surprised someone of Popper's renown would even waste time on this argument. In what ethical system is tolerance ever a good for its own sake and not some higher ideal?

Upvoted for bringing it to my attention, though. :-)
The slow, inexorable creep toward traditional business models continues.
I've been using Zappa https://github.com/Miserlou/Zappa for a few side projects and even at work, and you can definitely set up a robust version-controlled, CI + UAT + CD pipeline if you have the discipline.

* Dev: develop inside Docker container identical to Lambda environment https://github.com/lambci/docker-lambda

* CI: test via Jenkins/GoCD/Travis/CircleCI, inside docker

* Staging: deploy to staging host on merge

* UAT: against staging env, break build if any user-facing tests fail

* Prod: deploy exact same package we deployed to Staging
Ask HN: Bus or train commuter counting
I am trying to find a device or solution that counts the number of passengers coming in and going out of a bus or train. I'm so far thinking of a Raspberry Pi with a camera, mounted near each bus or train door. I'm uncertain of whether I would be able to count passengers with OpenCV or some other ML library.

Does anyone know of a relatively cheap or DIY solution?

Thanks
If one wants to upkeep civilisation, one needs to train its citizens to protect the infrastructure, the backbone, one needs to train the citizen, to repair, to provide, to create, to fight, against all that corrodes. So if liberty dies, one cell every day, it can rise again, harder and stronger, recreated not by a goverment, which can turn sour any day in power- but by something - which to erradicate, would mean the end of the nation.
Tim Ferriss also mentioned this issue in his recent AMA [1] when discussing why he recently relocated to Austin. He describes it as "a peculiar form of McCarthyism masquerading as liberal open-mindedness." The whole comment is worth reading.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7erct8/i_am_tim_ferri...
It's doomed to fail. YouTube allows creators to profit and build businesses for themselves. Facebook shares none of it's revenue with creators and this is not a sustainable model in the long term.
or.......it could be they saw the writing on the wall and have already been paying for better bandwidth since 2014....

https://news.avclub.com/netflix-to-pay-comcast-for-bandwidth...
In fact, the only ideas I’m afraid of letting people say are the ones that I think may be true and that I don’t like.

I think this is the most interesting section in the whole essay. Is Sam really suggesting that he wants to supress the truth because he doesn't like what the truth is telling us. Here is a totally novel idea - how about changing your mind when the evidence changes.
I think that certainly comes into it. Seems perverse to take the money you make from sales and give a cut of it to your competitor, who can then reduce the prices in their own store.
Ask HN: Anyone passionate about the airline industry?
It's difficult to find people in the Bay Area that are passionate about the airline industry, so wanted to reach out here and see if anyone has an interest in this field and is interested in discuss new airline models.
Sam Altman is an idiot.

The tolerance for "gay people are evil" has, more than once, led to "gay people must die". In fact, it is an inescapable consequence - if you declare people evil, you do declare you want to rid the world of them.

And coming from that point: You are still free to say this, of course. And everybody in the Bay Area is free to say it, too. But there are consequences to your speech. And the consequence to this particular speech is that most sane people will shun you. Tough luck, Sam. We've seen your colors when you desperately clung to Peter Thiel, you've just shown a little bit more of yourself.

And yes, of course we must allow the free exchange of ideas. But speech that strips away the humanity of others is not "an idea". It's hate. And it cannot be accepted in a civil society, without undermining the very foundations of that society.

I find it especially amusing that he thinks "gay people are evil" is perfectly fine, but "biotech work is unethical" is something that really shouldn't be said. He couldn't be much clearer about his actual intentions: he really wouldn't like criticism of the things that make him money, and to not annoy the existing "talent", bigotry should continue to be OK.

Putting that half-baked kind of intellectual dreck under a Galileo quote is a truly Silicon Valley thing.
> If it's true that the majority wanted to keep net neutrality, then how come the majority was ignored?

Because the majority (at least, as weighted for electoral influence in both political branches of government) has prioritized other things in voting for representatives. Legislation, whether direct votes or through representatives, involves not only opinions on particular questions, but opinions on the relative priority of questions, which effects how questions are aggregated and how those aggregated questions are answered.

The majority wants net neutrality, sure, but continuously says (by voting) that they care about it much less than they care about other things, and that they are willing to sacrifice NN tomget those other things.
Clickable Link:

https://excel.uservoice.com/forums/304921-excel-for-windows-...

[disclaimer+bias: on Python team @ msft & would love to see this happen!]
It's completely unsurprising.

cf) The entire history of the term "states' rights".
I didn't say it was the "truth" or anything like that. What are you even saying?
The only protest that makes a damned bit of difference is the vote.

Once in a long while citizens clean house. Major parties dissolve, etc, and fresh leadership emerges. This will happen again once rank-and-file on the left and right begin to find consensus on some key issues like diminishing freedoms, privacy, and corrupt leadership.

It's my opinion that ideology gives one tunnel vision and shouldn't be encouraged. There are things we can ALL be pissed about, let's talk about those things. Above all, we should agree that "incumbency" and "party affiliation" are nasty things.
For those who don’t know what this is about: Singapore each month holds an auction where people bid for the right to drive a car. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_Entitlement:

”Before buying a new vehicle, potential vehicle owners in Singapore are required by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) to first place a monetary bid for a Certificate of Entitlement (COE). The number of available COEs is governed by a quota system called the Vehicle Quota System (VQS) and is announced by LTA in April of each year with a review in October for possible adjustments for the period of one year starting from May. Approximately one-twelfth of the yearly quota is auctioned off each month in a sealed-bid, uniform price auction system and successful bidders pay the lowest winning bid.”

For $50k, you can rent one of these cars 100,000 minutes, or 10,000 minutes a year, or slightly less than half an hour a day. And for that $50k you don’t even get a car, let alone gas and maintenance.
Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wild [pdf]
Perhaps that shouldn't be construed as hacking either. If I send a link to someone via email, they shouldn't need to worry about breaking the law if they click it.

I do think that a company who has been victim of a SQL injection attack will have a better chance in court then, say, LinkedIn in this specific case. At least this theoretical company has made some small effort to protect their data, however inept.
You know that Altman himself is gay, right?
Well I guess I'll wait another 14 years before I comment again. I'm sure you'll all still be here pretending this is a real thing.
What it doesn't mention is the high latency of the 99th percentile of requests. If that's something that you don't want, then avoid Lambda, for now.
Could you please explain why you consider it to be inflammatory? I'm at a loss as to why you consider it to be so, when it's probably not.
I mentioned that theory in my comment. It doesn't explain everything though. A conservative in California has basically zero voting power and is vastly outnumbered by liberals. Ostracizing conservatives from the tech industry isn't actually helping their cause. And is actively hurting it by giving the other conservatives fuel for a victim narrative.

In fact that's the biggest problem. These two groups completely hate each other, but live in separated regions. If they were completely mixed together geographically there would be no issue. People fired from liberal run companies could just go work at conservative run ones. We would have conservative social networks and liberal ones, and the "free market of free speech" argument would actually work.
> On this one issue, it's possible they're even right.

IF there was competition. However, the ISPs have sought to end that.
It's an opinion. Opinions require no proof, no matter how controversial.
It's looking more and more like it's a modified-but-largely-intact BSD kernel with a 3ds api (not abi?) compatible userspace. Time will probably prove me wrong.
> But compare it even with a GIMP is a joke.

How?
Maybe it's just my friend group, but absolutely everything is scheduled and planned through Facebook events. I basically don't visit, I use Social Fixer to trim down the news feed when I do, but Events is invaluable.
I believe the 10th Amendment covers what you are thinking of.

>The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

If the Federal government chooses not to regulate it, then the states should be allowed to do so.

Edit: Here the FCC is choosing to not regulate Telecoms as "Common Carriers", so would not the states then be allowed to do so, barring other federal agencies that may be able to regulate "Common Carriers" (ala the FTC)? Honest question.
> In Chrome we ensure that all features we ship to the web go through a public standards process.

Ehm, basically every major feature Chrome has shipped has been shipped before the standard was even discussed. SPDY shipped long before HTTP/2 was even finalized, and QUIC is doing the same. NaCl shipped in the same way, without any standardization, and to this date, earth.google.com depends on it.

In general, your problem is that you only consider browser developers. In the past, the WHATWG has decided to redefine the URL standard, then shame cURL for not following the standard, without ever involving anyone from the curl project in the discussion. The URL discussion affects everything from Android’s IPC system to curl, from industrial machinery to the web. The WHATWG explicitly declared that the URL spec is designed to completely, and exhaustively, obsolete and deprecate any existing URL or URI spec.

Yet, the only people ever contacted about this, and who were given the ability to take part in the discussion, were representatives from the three large browser vendors.
Yeah but in fairness, the other candidate was someone who was also a proven liar, had the Benghazi scandal under her belt, and had the FBI declare publicly that she violated laws related to the handling of classified information.

As South Park put it, it's the choice between "Giant Douche vs Turd Sandwich".
>Most people would require action which creates direct (not second order as in this example) harm of a large magnitude before applying the label to a person.

That doesn't make any sense. If I directly try to eradicate the Jews I'm immoral, if my actions just have a second or third order effect of eradicating the Jews then I'm not? Most people probably use the direct vs second order distinction when it's themselves who are doing something unethical via second order effects but that's just to save some cognitive dissonance. If I know my actions have second order effects of hurting lots of people and I still do it that's unethical.

>In any case labels mean different things to different people in emotionally charged subjects. Which is why they don't have a place in honest debate.

Reality isn't an honest debate, reality is realpolitik. People are likely to be emotionally charged when they're told that it's okay they're being hurt because it's just a second order effect after all. Learn to deal with that emotion and argue against it, not make posts on the internet opining for something which never existed.
That's the greatest thing about twitter: You never run out of fresh content.
Bulgaria has enough Bitcoins to pay off fifth of debt
>Instead of using websites that show the same thing for everyone.

But that's a good thing. It sounds like you WANT to be ensconced in a political bubble. People splitting off into echo chambers is a major source of the problems we see today.
I recently watched a Mega Corp fire the entire IT Ops department and hire a handful cloud consultants to move all of their current vSphere (thousands of VMs) infrastructure to Azure.

The rationalization was that in the long run it was cheaper to maintain the status quo, and not have to worry about networking, firewall, and replication issues by hand. I'm pretty sure MS also gave them a large discount at that scale.
> To get the really good ideas, we need to tolerate really bad and wacky ideas too.

part of the problem is demand for applications for theoretical research done at universities. You can't just do research on wacky ideas because the money you need to do the research have deliverables attached.
That is not another way of putting it.

That is a very different statement that comes from you defining conservatives as being against what you are for. But that is generally not the case. They are for something different than you are, and sometimes it comes into opposition with what you want.

This is in principle no different a substitution than pro-life people defining pro-choice ones as pro-murder. Obviously you see why that one is unfair. Can you see why the other is as well?
There are plenty of moderate conservatives and christians that don't hate gay people either. I'm not sure what your point is. My point is that, statistically, a Muslim is much more likely to have extreme beliefs on social issues.
Is it possible to use a custom TTF font for text?
> A forecast should go bankrupt before it gets to the final event, what?

Can go bankrupt, not should.

He is saying that if in finance someone would make such a ridiculous forecast, his forecast would be shorted into oblivion and he would have lost most of the money bet on the forecast before the event even took place.

Imagine two relatively matched football teams, but a bookie offering 10:1 bets on one of them. There would have been massive bets against that bookie.

Given the recent history of american elections and other factors, a 50:50 prediction is much more sensible than a 98:2 one. But because journalists don't actually put money on their predictions, they can spout whatever numbers.

He is also complaining that even with a lot of polls hovering around 50%-50%, that 98%-2% prediction was still on, which doesn't really make any (math) sense (binary options, delta, ...).

In his math paper he describes this in more precise form.
- Spend much more time on HackerNews.

Jokes aside, I did the same. Its a healthy move, I also forgot my FB password on my main computer and have not gone through the trouble of using chrome to look it up.
There is not a long history of vegans killing people for their meat eating beliefs. You are wrong to equate the two.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LG...
Funny, I experience exactly the opposite moving to SF from Zurich (Switzerland). I could write the same blog post but replace SF with Zurich and it would work for my experience.

I would like to see data on this. This seems like a very anectodal post (and I think the controversial comments underline it).
I'm an NN supporter and don't love "more competition" actually. Anarchists also are for net neutrality fyi.
Another interesting tidbit:

John Williams put the opening theme to star wars in the same key as the Fanfare (b-flat major)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_Century_Fox#Logo
But can states impose massive taxes on the isps that don’t follow a set of regulations?
I'm really interested in what you're doing in a startup that needs all that power locally.

For me, I would probably be happy with a 2 core macbook but I use a 4 core macbook pro. If I'm doing something that needs a lot of compute, it's in the cloud.
The 4th amendment is a 270 year old rule that is "stretched and deformed" to fit personal electronic devices too. In either case, we don't need a specific law for each use-case as technology evolves.
Possibly. My experiences have all been from Australia.
> Damore did make a scientific case for his claims and referenced a bunch of studies.

Ehhh. Among my friends/coworkers one of the biggest objections was how dicey a lot of the referenced research was, and how much he was bending or extending conclusions to fit his narrative. At the very best his essay was awful science, but to me it felt more like a half-hearted attempt to cherrypick studies that sort of reinforced his preexisting beliefs, which is kind of the opposite of science.
http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6880152186 - That's last mile wireless. Throughput is hampered by my crappy usb NIC because all of my thunderbolt ports are in use. With thunderbolt ethernet I'm getting the full 500Mpbs that I pay $45/mo for.
This article might give you some inspiration: https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-09/tired-waiting-high-sp...
I suspect the reason these tech giants are saying they support net neutrality while doing little about it is to keep goodwill with consumers more than anything else.
Still trying to wrap my head around what he's trying to get at exactly (interesting that he never actually says what people in China accepted more than in the Bay Area - my bet is that it's not something about human rights in China) - but so far the only 2 things I'm getting are:

1) It somehow should be acceptable, in a dream society, to say that gay people are evil, but not to question the ethics of scientism.

2) A white dude who doesn't speak Chinese somehow finds China to be a better place for startups and freedom of speech, because there is some backlash against the technolibertarianism he peddles in his home city. Never mind that political activists routinely get executed in China and all that.

Sam seems like he has gone far into the deep end. Not sure if this what happens to your brain when you are super rich and constantly surrounded with people as rich as you, but I am struggling to make sense of it any other way.

If this had been posted by anyone else than the CEO of YCombinator, it'd have been dismissed like the drivel that it is.
> I think what you're experiencing is value mismatch. When the culture won't bend the way you're used to, it can seem as though it's resistant to bending at all.

If I need to match a culture's values in order to have an open discussion, that culture is intolerant.
Presumably they didn't do it cause they wanted to build a userbase though. It was always gonna be monetized they just preferred growth to money initially.
This is a good point, thank you for bringing it up! I added a footnote about it: https://norasandler.com/2017/12/05/Write-a-Compiler-2.html#f...
So is Peter Thiel. What's your point?
Yes. And? That has nothing to do with the argument I just made.
What would be a better solution, IP address check to allow only known google crawlers perhaps?
But if you knew that a majority of the population was simply watching advertisements, wouldn't it annoy you? Facebook has commoditized the social nature of humanity and now they are selling it. I highly doubt Mark would let his daughter freely roam FB.
Assuming these people actually exist, don't you think they should have a little more backbone? If you can't handle any criticism of your ideas, how can you be an effective advocate?
The FCC voted in 2015 to preempt state restrictions in Tennessee and North Carolina against municipal broadband [1][2], in response to a petition brought by the cities of Chattanooga, TN and Wilson, NC. This was struck down by the Sixth Circuit in 2016 [3].

It's going to be interesting to see this idea tested again.

[1] https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-order-preempting-t... [2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/02/fcc-o... [3] http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/16a0189p-06.pdf
I meant an arbitrary established player giving another arbitrary established player a nicer deal than a startup could get.

Everyone should feel free to insert proper nouns that make more sense to them.
Have you considered that the culture of hospitality in Texas might be related to the values found in the Bible you are so quick to dismiss?

Values are like the vitamins of culture: You don't notice how helpful they are until you get scurvy.
> You don't find it bad that a bunch of people, based on their own non-objective oppinion

What is an 'objective opinion'?

> get to ruin someones business and/or career?

Are you saying that it's a bad idea for people to boycott businesses, or that boycotting businesses shouldn't be allowed? If it's the former, how do you distinguish between 'good' and 'bad' reasons to refrain from purchasing from a business? If it's the latter, what would that even mean? Should people be forced to buy from a particular company?

> I feel like I'm talking to a Hitler youth right now

If calling someone unethical is "shutting down a conversation", what is comparing someone to the Hitler youth?

> Which is not what we're talking about. Only in your own mind. But here is the issue again, as soon as you decide, on your own, that something is "harmful" for however you decide that, now you get to do whatever you want.

As opposed to (objectively?) determining if something is 'objectively unethical'?