skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
”It seems to be will-power and a true desire to lose and keep off weight”

We can’t objectively measure either, so that doesn’t say anything. One can always answer “why doesn’t x lose weight” by “must not want to hard enough”.

Yet, I somewhat agree with that, but with the added remark that the amount of willpower needed can vary enormously, depending on one’s genetics, environment, etc.
Oh man. This is my idea of nirvana. Basically done with any other data-store except maybe for full-text search.
It, of course, depends on how well you use it. If you develop a good marketing plan, which you should have, and execute it well, it will be time and effort well-spent.
There is also a problem with that. Essentially 100% of alcoholics started out as moderate drinkers.
> Or is this essentially an easier to read/remember version of latitude/longitude?

It's more like the hierarchical telephone numbering system. If you know it's local, the code can be much shorter. It doesn't need to be globally unique; just unique in the same city.
Facebook’s Destructive Ethos Imperils Democracy
Uh, isn’t that exactly what the parent comment just said? It sounded to me like they were doing negatives.
I was just taking issue with the title. Bug bounties don't make bugs go away.
90% of billions and billions of dollars is still billions and billions of dollars.
The pills don't magically give you the ability to focus. They make you nervous and neurotic. You focus on things not because you have improved self control, but because your brain is closer to a panic and more anxious. Now I'm ultra neurotic and overall brainfucked. You didn't miss out. Oh also, they kill your appetite you so hardly eat and you'd end up inches shorter than you are now.
Yes.

Out of most math texts, this is very accessible and mind-expanding. Even if you don't get everything on the first pass, you'll come out with a lot of interesting insight into the field.

I don't know your level, but I don't recall anything too insurmountable for someone with a decent base in math.
What's different about this from "Third Way" politics?

Clinton (Bill) was a Third Way neoliberal who basically believed what you and that blog post are saying. Clinton (Hillary) saw those policies defeated 2 years ago.

[S]omething different and distinct from liberal capitalism with its unswerving belief in the merits of the free market and democratic socialism with its demand management and obsession with the state. The Third Way is in favour of growth, entrepreneurship, enterprise and wealth creation but it is also in favour of greater social justice and it sees the state playing a major role in bringing this about. So in the words of... Anthony Giddens of the LSE the Third Way rejects top down socialism as it rejects traditional neo liberalism.
— Report from the BBC, 1999,

It seems they are discovering a 30 year old term and blogging about it. What's been rehabilitated?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

It's probably different in degrees, but let's be realistic, nothing has been rehabilitated nor is anything new being said.
What's your beef with using "a lot of SaaS services, with no on-premises solution"? Why waste money by locking it into on-premises hardware?
Are quaternions more smooth and connected than complex numbers? My understanding was that higher-dimensional hypercomplex numbers tend to lose useful structure. I'm also curious what being connected in this context means.
To reverse your argument: without data protection laws we're just trusting corporations that they won't commit any transgression. Your "worst case" description is exactly the current scenario that we have in place being practiced by corporations who have your private data: all you have from them is "trust us".
I finally got Birkenstocks just because they are apparently bullet proof and comfortable, but after something like 18 months of wearing them non-stop (almost every day), they have completely worn through and are not usable.

After that I had a pair of Walmart flip-flops that lasted only half the time under similar use but they were 1/10th the price.

Before that I had a pair of no-name not flip-flop (i.e., velcro strap) sandals that lasted nearly 6 years of fairly continual use.

There is no particular moral or conclusion here, they are just anecdotes. I just think you can't make any general rule about "it's better to buy quality than cheap" or vice-versa: it's all situation specific and depends on the quantitative costs and lifetimes.

There are many examples of "it's expensive to be poor". There also many examples of where it's not, and how people have what would have been considered a very high standard of living in the past on minimal output. Many not poor people are also definitely not doing the boot anecdote thing posits: they aren't buying one set of boots and wearing them their entire lifetime. They aren't buying one set of hardwood furniture they use from their 20s until they die and they aren't buying a quality vehicle and running it for 20 years on synthetic oil.
You are almost, but not quite, correct, but in a way that is still wrong.

Like so many things, ADHD is just part of a natural spectrum of cognitive differences. In the world that humans evolved to live in, the hunter gatherer world, it doesn't have as many disadvantages and it has some advantages. It's good to have diversity in populations, even in things like cognition. But in a modern industrial world it has a lot more disadvantages. And given that that's the world we live in, we have to acknowledge that reality. ADHD is very much an attention based system of cognition, but that's not really suited to the modern world particularly well. There are lots of things that people need to learn, and cognitive tasks that people need to perform, that still need to get done regardless of whether they are interesting or not. People with ADHD can develop coping skills or use drugs that make that much easier, but it's still necessary.

It might not be 100% fair to call it a "disorder" so much as a kind of impedance mismatch with modern society, but the mismatch still exists and still needs to be addressed.
>Do we make the word a better place of we cause the destruction of many life-style businesses that provide jobs, a public service, and aren't rapacious and create an environment where only the most aggressive and profitable companies can survive at all, but you get to exact a 3% tax on them?

The 3% tax isn't being implemented because it's the best system. It's being done because tech giants have consistently weaseled their way around the normal way of taxing businesses by fiddling with transfer prices and corrupting governments.

>Now what? US Internet services still makes money, EU citizens still have access, but there's no corporate footprint. Do you really think with such huge traffic, if Google and Facebook and Twitter shutdown local offices and entities that businesses still won't advertise with them? Advertisers go where the audience is.

In this hypothetical scenario Google/Facebook/Twitter lose all their actual European clients, the advertisers. It's easy for the European states to just block the few relevant financial flows, there's no need for a Great Firewall for the users.

>I think many people who came to the internet decades later perhaps don't have that sense of awe I do, that sense of its specialness. And this continual chipping away at that original Utopian dream with nationalistic, provincial concerns, is to me the unacceptable collateral damage.

Are you also arguing for either an internet government to do internet wide taxation, or a ban on commercial use of the internet? Because otherwise what you're arguing is that tech giants should be able to use the independence of cyberspace that we both cherish to do a run around of the absolutely normal practice of taxing businesses that operate in specific geographies. If we let them keep doing that then states will end up having to put up more and more draconion barriers to the internet well beyond your worst case scenario of a Great Firewall of Europe.
Meltdown/Spectre was not a "fiasco" due to Microsoft and Intel not finding out. It was "responsibly" disclosed to the companies, and there were multiple months to prepare a response. A bigger bounty would not change anything for Meltdown/Spectre.

It was a "fiasco" because it affected over 90% of all servers and laptops out there. And there was just no way to prepare enough of a response, while keeping it secret. For a few months, too few engineers knew about it for good mitigation development. Towards the end, as more people who needed to know were looped in, everyone could see it coming. The vulnerabilities, and mitigations, were just too big.
Obligatory.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11189688
I know someone who wasn't diagnosed until he was an adult (20s), and credits getting proper treatment as the only reason he was able to go on and complete his Ph.D, so I think that a little hard to believe.
Irrelevant. Ladbrokes is not a US firm, I don't know, need to know, or care what their legal system is. It's entirely possible their laws require them to comply with US law, or that they have assets in the US.

A website hosted in the US, owned by a US citizen, residing in the US, is not subject to laws written in other countries.
Some time ago I had to look for details on a transaction I did on Ripple and couldn't find a simple website that took a transaction id and showed me details on that transaction. Why is that?

I see you're linking to Bithomp here, and that's what I found, the only one, but still it wasn't sufficient. Bithomp is confusing and doesn't show all information, just a quick (and confusing) summary.
Do you have an good example for this, yours or someone else's? I've never thought of that as a learning-a-language project.
Another problem is that many abstainers might already be at risk for either having once been problem drinkers or avoiding alcohol due to adverse reaction to alcohol.

In other words, moderate drinkers may be a self-selecting group for people with good health.
MTU or Spanning Tree, so frequently the bugbear of weird network behavior.
very bad ad...
Spotify? Booking?
I'm guessing you have a very strong math background if you are suggesting Concrete Math to a random person asking about self-teaching.

Concrete math requires MUCH more background than this book. Besides the real gems and clever tricks Mathematics for Computer Science appear after the fourth chapter.
>It makes companies think in depth about the data they hold on me and how they process it.

Except, of course, if your company is one of those favored with an exemption from the GDPR. Because we can't have everyone playing by the same rules in the EU.
Blogging also allows you to commit information / concepts / marketing about your product into written form. I've found this extends my understanding, gives me more ideas, is a source of feedback and this written information can be reused for other things at a later date.
Who do you believe is rediscovering a 30 year old term here?

Have you heard of the Adam Smith Institute?

It is a neoliberal think-tank and over the years many of its policies have been adopted by the UK.

That blog post was written by the executive director.

> The inability to come up with a new interesting term (or acknowledge the history behind the existing term) doesn't portend great things.

Quoting your previous deleted post here.

Are you aware that the meanings they're assigning to the term, are actually in line with what was meant when it was first used at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium in 1938?
See also:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15770609
Don't think the intent of my question was communicated clearly. Let's try again.

From your original post:

> The only reason this is exaggerated as a "data breech" is because of the connection to the Trump campaign.

You have provided no evidence of this, and until you do, your comment is read as a case of whataboutism[0]. Because we are not shoehorned into the pursuit of a unilateral solution, we can both [A] call out Trump's unethical engagement of Cambridge Analytica (CA) and [B] lobby for more stringent privacy regulations, like the EU is doing.

Given the, as a prior commenter said, 25 scandals, along with string of accusations of indecent conduct, collusion, etc. that Trump is clouded with, the conclusion being made is that his engagement is not the unknowing of an unethical actor acting on his behalf, rather the turning of a blind eye.

So given the inflammatory nature of the original comment:

> Let's be realistic here. This headline is nothing but partisanship.

So in sum, on first glance your comment leads me to assume you have an agenda.

Assuming that this isn't true, lets talk about main issue here: the micro targeting of ads, and the usage of this "data breach" in the Trump campaign.

Frankly, this scares me. The power this data provides and the way that it can be wielded should scare people - who wants to live in a world where the government/corporations/people can induce people into certain behaviors? Whether Trump or Clinton uses this information would result in people bringing up their pitchforks.

I don't think that we're exaggerating here calling it a data breach - it is a gross misuse of personal information, however gained. And while I'll admit the term data breach is a bit of a stretch, the connotation of the word fits perfectly with the situation. People downloaded an app for a survey, had their
entire social network scraped, and then had that information used for an ulterior motive, without them knowing at all. We should be holding them accountable for their scummy behavior. Facebook already is starting to.

We've already seen the GOP bring up the email campaign and Benghazi for the entire length of the Clinton campaign. Note the irony here as the GOP is almost completely silent over America's current president's daily antics. It is the lack of response from the GOP toward any of the recent political events that is characterizing HN's response toward CA as overblown.

So with that said, why do you believe that it's unethical to call out Trump and by extension CA's actions.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
What % of their revenue comes from selling customer order flow?
Neoliberals want to use the state as an enforcement vehicle for private interests, so neoliberalism leads to more corruption of the state while libertarianism seeks to abandon it.

Also, neoliberalism is much more crafty with propaganda, by necessity. Neoliberals use advertising and public relations to mask their alleged conflicting agendas.

For example, Trump is a neoliberal in libertarian clothing, while Clinton is a neoliberal in democrat clothing. They are both neoliberals. If they weren't, they would lack the cooperation from private interests needed to run.

Libertarians lack cooperation from the private sector because their public image is not "supportive, caring",

Democrats lack cooperation from the private sector because their actual political interests (like defending the working class) are in conflict with it.

So, neoliberalism makes the choice easy by combining the best of both worlds: dystopic support for corporate takeover AND the public image of loving kindness.
I think most people on HN are paid for their expertise. You don't garner much respect by pushing fluff. So most of us should err (heavily imo) on the side of too few rather than too many articles. I am also B2B, and no professional wants a cluttered inbox.
The USA is an Enlightenment creation, designed to learn from and avoid the failures of previous government systems; as such they owe more to the spirit of Ancient Athens than to that of Ancient Rome.
U.K., Land of ‘Brexit,’ Quietly Outsources Some Surgeries to France
It would be nice to outline more of the history that shows the gradient we have gone through from selective breeding, to scientific plant breeding[1] to even accelerating mutations through radiation[2], one of my favorite fruits (ruby red rio star grapefruit) came from this! It's not just a handful of examples that have gone beyond selective breeding and occasional crosses and the efforts have only been increasing!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_plant_breeding#Scie...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_gardening#cite_note-:0-...
It probably depends on your product.

The more expensive your service is, the more you'll probably need to offer proof that it's worth the price. If your service is going to cost me a one time purchase price of $1, I'm going to buy it regardless of what you say. If it's going to cost me $499/month, I'm going to research the heck out of it, which would probably include reading your blog and/or the best parts of your site to find the information I need.

The harder your product is to use, because somethings are just complicated no how simple you try to make them, you'll need an efficient way to educate your customers. One use for a blog is to have a place where you can tell stories about people using your product. "How Susie solved use getp0d.com to double her income" or "Using getp0d.com as a CRM for your motel's reservations". You can use a blog as a place to put any ol' random thought you have until there's a better place to put said thought. My company's old blog was mostly for making it sound like my services my be worth what the price I quoted you.
I commend your organization: by following some good practices when it comes to data collection and storage it's already very far into the process of being GDPR compliant, it looks like all you all are missing is the documenting it part of it where the processes are clearly defined and nominating someone to be the data protection officer.

He was asking in general however, without a mechanism to control that corporations are doing what yours is already doing, how would we verify compliance?
This simply isn’t true.

I’ve spent lots of time and money getting data out of FB.

You can pay to get anonymized topic data via DataSift and others, you can pay to run ads against users you have email addresses for (but you don’t get their data) or you can scrape (which is against the terms of service and they have an aggressive anti bot system to stop it - unlike Twitter).

Their political support systems are analytics support to ad buying.
That'll tune the one string to the other, but not necessarily bring the guitar into tune. This guy goes through a bunch of other combinations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMhrF-LvfUk
There's more detailed per-country E waste statistics in the "Global E-waste monitor 2017" report, see Annex 3 at the end [1].

Here's per-capita E-waste metrics for a subset of countries that might be interesting (because they produce high levels of per-capita E-waste, or have large populations, or both). I've added a median per-capita income column for reference, from Gallup [2].

Country E-waste Median income
kg/inhab. kUSD/inhab.
----------------------------------
Norway 28.5 19.3
UK 24.9 12.4
Denmark 24.8 18.3
Netherlands 23.9 14.5
Australia 23.6 15.0
Germany 22.8 14.1
France 21.3 12.4
Belgium 21.2 10.2
Austria 20.9 12.3
Spain 20.1 7.3
Canada 20.0 15.2
US 19.4 15.5
Japan 16.9 10.8
S. Korea 13.1 11.4
Russia 9.7 4.1
Argentina 8.4 4.1
Mexico 8.2 2.9
Turkey 7.9 2.5
Brazil 7.4 2.2
Thailand 7.4 1.8
S. Africa 5.7 1.2
China 5.2 1.8
Indonesia 4.9 0.5
Philippines 2.8 0.5
Pakistan 1.6 0.5
India 1.5 0.6
Vietnam 1.5 1.1
Bangladesh 0.9 0.6

[1] - https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Climate-Change/Documents/GEM%20...

[2] - http://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-househol...

Edit: as per the global E waste monitor report, there is a large amount of variability between countries in terms of the rate that e-waste is "collected" versus being disposed of by other methods e.g. in landfill. For example, Norway is at the top of the list in terms of mass of raw e-waste produced per inhabitant, but also has a high e-waste collection rate of 74% . In comparison, Australia only has an e-waste collection rate of 7.5% with the remainder going to landfill.

It'd be interesting to know how effective "collection" of waste is after it is produced versus prevention of that waste in the first place.

There's a bunch of interesting EU e-waste data here [3].

We can see in [4] that Norway's "recycling rate of e-waste", defined as the "collection rate" multiplied by the "reuse and recycling rate" is 50% . From the above table we know that Norway's collection rate is 74% so the "reuse and recycling rate" must be about 2/3 . But, the "reuse and recyling rate" is "calculated by dividing the weight of the WEEE that enters the recycling/preparing for re-use facility by the weight of total treatment of WEEE" -- i.e. it doesn't appear to measure how efficient the recycling and re-use itself is, in terms of output, it appears to just measures how much loss there is before we get to the recycling / reuse stage.

[3] - http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/waste/key-waste-streams/wee...

[4] - http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1...
It's a waste of time, until it's clever marketing.
↑ use this link to bypass paywall
Shouldn't it be required to list funding sources on research?

It's surprising that I still see studies about the benefits of wine, chocolate, coffee, or basically any other vice as being healthy and life extending.

It's not surprising that these studies are often funded by the industries themselves without mentioning it as a disclosure in the research or in the articles promoting the research.
Tail recursion is a programming idea left over from the LISP era. It's from when iteration constructs were "while" and "for", and there were no "do this to all that stuff" primitives. Python doesn't really need it.
I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around how complex numbers are an improvement over the reals. >.<
Maybe people who can moderate a vice like alcohol also make other healthy decisions in life.
Cambridge Analytics just got banned for scraping data (stealing..) from Facebook.

That’s the exact opposite of Facebook selling them the data.
That wouldn't provide any SEO benefits for his website, which I imagine is one of the primary goals.

Medium is good if you care only about having your articles read.

Your own website is good if you want to boost your website's Google rank.
just ordinary virtual function that discriminates upon arguments (at compile-time).
I'm a complete layman regarding biology, so I'm aware my question might be completely stupid. I understand that the genotypes within a species change in response to environmental change. What I do not know is: is the amount of difference between the genetic difference between two random modern humans and the genetic difference between a random modern human and a random 100,000 year old human significant?
> how much better off is society?

We should ask that to the dozens of millions of Americans who have their private data for sale even as I type this after the Equifax breach. Bonus: we can literally buy it and use that data to contact them directly and ask :)
Not only that but we are talking about a timeframe in which any of our present divisions are totally not fathomable let alone in existence.

I take exception even with your examples. How long has there been an "Italy"? In one sense, since the current state emerged in 1861. In another, Italia would only have meant land south of the Rubicon, excluding northern Italy. In another still, it's probably some Etruscan word with some completely different meaning. (Just a guess, I have not looked it up.)

So when you go all the way back to when Europeans adapted for lighter skin and before... There is no "Italy". Maybe even there isn't any "Europe". I think the people answering my comment with "but it's always been us vs them" are really grasping for some cynicism to make themselves feel superior, because I would ask, who exactly is the us or the them they are talking about? Because no current group existed. It is constantly changing. That is the whole point.
OK, but I first read the Wikipedia article linked a long time ago. Probably like ten years ago.