skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, I want to hear from companies in super limited ways. As an example; Hasbro makes one product I'm interested in (dropmix cards). If I could sign up to a list that sent me an email if (and only if) that product was on sale for 20% or more, I'd be very happy to do that. But I can't, I can only sign up for the mass mailing list. So no thanks Hasbro.
Good point. In many cases the higher wages are somewhat negated by the time investment though.
I am a former gun owner and think assault weapons legislation based on pistol grips doesn't accomplish anything.

Yes, why not base legislation on the power of a weapon measured as, say, ft*lbs delivered in 20 seconds. A 50 round drum magazine on a Ruger 10/22 rifle - no problem. But on an AR-15 style rifle - not allowed.
Once you've accepted that reality = reality and that to discuss reality, humans always need to revert to models, then any further discussion of the nature of reality seems like a dead end. Because any way you try to discuss it is a simplification. Maybe it's more accurate to just accept that we're firmly in the realm of models and forget about trying to define reality itself. So in that way it becomes kind of pointless to discuss the nature of reality.
The point of the gimmick is that doing it would reduce the net debt that the United States Government had, thereby keeping us away from the debt ceiling.

In any case a fundamental problem is that we have rather more debt than we have any feasible way to pay. A very large part of that debt is held in the form of Treasury bonds issued to Social Security. Which leads to Social Security being financially solvent on paper for many decades to come. In fact it looks like once the Baby Boom retires, either Social Security is solvent or the US government is solvent, but not both.
Destroy, no that's a lot cheaper. Remain capable of fighting two major wars at any given time, that's more expensive I think they reduced the policy level capability requirement to one major war and something smaller within the last two years.

Source was a naval officer, still keep up with the professional journals.
I don't understand what you're driving at. An echo would contain no new information. There's clearly more information in my comment than the original post. That you're upset I did so in the same number of words as a tweet is confusing to me.
> The only explanation for this constant re-invention that I can come up with (and that's shared among others I know) is that Google doesn't care/need a dependency tool because of their mono repo.

That's a pretty good argument for using a monorepo, don't you think? A single organisation's code should all be in a single repo, which means that a single version of a dependency is used within the organisation, and that updating to a new version of that dependency is a single, self-contained project.
That and all this acting can be exhausting or make you avoid such situations altogether.
The question is why having color vision was an advantage, and the evolutionary answer has to be because there's something about reality which makes it an advantage. The evolutionary argument for total skepticism/illusion can't work, because organisms wouldn't survive if their entire perceptual system produced only illusions.

An organism does have to be able to distinguish between food, mates, shelter, danger, etc. or it won't pass it's genes on. And that's where reality comes in. Even invoking evolution is to assume that evolution has some basis in reality, otherwise why invoke it as an explanation for illusion?

If our perceptions and cognition have no basis in reality, then neither does evolution.
Any suggestions for open engines with some similarity to the tools provided in Unity3d, Lumberyard/Crytek, or Unreal4?
and investors simultaneously kill competition by honest companies...'you have a 10 year roadmap to do X? not interesting. i'll invest $100m in this company that says they can do 10X in one year!'
A while back I tried to create a commenting system that explicitly tied comments to blocks of code. The idea was that if you tried to change the code without also changing the comment, or vis versa, a git pre-commit hook would yell at you. Unfortunately it wound up being less tractable than I anticipated, but I think the basic idea has some promise.
How a Political Engineering Firm Exposed Their Code Base
Might be even win for the store as they need to pay for the waste handling.
This gave me pause:

"The 5.7×28mm SS190 has a muzzle velocity of roughly 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s, Mach 2) and can penetrate the NATO CRISAT vest or a Level IIIA Kevlar vest at a range of 200m"
In the case of Theranos, the investors should get domain experts as consultants when they invest.
Roy Fielding isn't a deity. The version would be encoded in the 'Accepts' content type header. There is little distinction, one is in-band (in the path) and one is out-of-band (in the header), but the information is still represented.
A rename.
Ah yes, writing a language in such a way that it helps you imagine it's another. Excellent coding practice!
I don't understand what "Dropbox support" is. Dropbox will sync any file.
How is this going to be a problem if the owner/publisher takes care of the seeding (i.e. they run a seeding node instead of or in addition to serving the content the traditional way)? IP laws have almost nothing to do with the way the content is delivered...
Well, there is reasons for it not being promoted by KDE itself that much.

1) They don't want to run a distro. KDE is distro-agnostic. Maintaining their own distribution would imply that this is the KDE distro, where you want to be to get the best KDE experience. (Hint: It's actually not.)

2) They don't consider it a distro. "Distribution" implies that someone spent some time to put together a collection of software which works reasonably well with one another. So, it would mean that they do integration testing. KDE does not do that with Neon. It's just Ubuntu with KDE smacked on top. The Ubuntu-part is tested, the KDE-part is somewhat tested, but the combination of those happens to function most of the time out of pure luck.

3) Many people looking for Ubuntu with KDE on it are (reasonably) new to Linux. If you're more skilled, you'll probably go for openSUSE or Manjaro. There's of course reasons why you might prefer Ubuntu even as an experienced user, but it is still the case that many noobs look into KDE Neon. And KDE Neon is not for noobs. The Ubuntu-part is stable, but the KDE-part is not, it's bleeding edge software. Often not really tested, so things might potentially explode there. The lack of integration testing adds to that. And then as the grand-grandparent comment hinted, KDE Neon does not come with a whole load of software. It misses lots of software that you'd expect in a full-featured operating system, which is also in particular bad for new Linux users.

As for waiting for a version that's going to be based on Ubuntu 18.04, I'm not sure, if that makes so much sense.
Presumable, or hopefully, Ubuntu will fix that hot mess themselves with 18.04. The most recent version of KDE is an LTS release, so they'd be hard-pressed to choose wrongly there, and they previously had such an outdated version of Qt, because they used that outdated version in Unity 8, which they've stopped developing, so they should not fuck up there either.

So, unless you actually continuously want to see the latest development in KDE, using KDE Neon won't make that much sense anymore after Ubuntu 18.04 is released.

Also, Ubuntu 18.04 is released in 2018 in April, hence 18.04, it's <year>.<month>.
And they usually release in April and October which is why you usually XX.04 and XX.10, with every second year in April being an LTS, so 18.04 is going to be the version number of the LTS. For smaller fixes, they add a number behind that: e.g. 16.04.5.
I've thought a lot about this (and I'm sure others have to); I think candidates generally fall in two buckets:

1. Can code:

a. Gifted:

These have a natural talent for coding and can crank out code at the drop of a hat

b. Persistent:

Have moderate-good talent for coding, they make up the gap with gifted coders
with sheer persistence and relentless pursuit for making themselves better

2. Cannot code/haven't coded in a long time

How can you test for coding?
In my view it's certainly not some academic question or the in-vogue programming interviews book. This is clearly proven to be red herring. Also at least in the bay area, there are set questions that FANG and other companies have which are shared all over the internet and amongst friends who work there. So an interview becomes a casting process for a role, where the script is the questions you have "rehearsed". This is an absolute facade and needs to stop!

I ask simple programming questions and look for "naturalness" in the way they answer and talk through the solutions. No complicated brain teasers or the smug "look at me, I know this obscure/complicated algorithm invented before I was born" questions.

Coding is one facet, the other one is design. No matter how good a coder you are if you have bad design skills it doesn't matter.
How do you test for design?

1. Resume experience: Talk through technical issues/challenges, pros/cons etc. of projects they've done before

2. A simple-moderate design question: If someone lists distributed systems as one of their skills, ask them a question on it. A decent amount of determination can be made about a candidate they way he/she answers.

I'm refining my process after each interview I take and would love feedback.
Does anybody know what the legal situation (in US or under the GDPR) is for data derived from inferences? E.g.: if he visits this nightclub he's gay, or if she goes to this clinic she's having an abortion. As the subject never told you, but rather you speculated it, it could be argued you don't know, and you don't have to record it in explicit terms. It also raises significant concerns about the accuracy, and whether the subject can even correct, let alone expunge such data, which could be sold on to credit rating agencies or whomever else.
It's different in that in places like India you have significantly more layers and a lot more history. Also a lot more bullshit.
State and Future of Heka (2016)
Thanks for posting this. Sujatha Gidla sounds like a really amazing, intelligent, and vibrant person.
Coinbase+Featured+in+HBO&#8217;s+Silicon+Valley+Season+5+Intro+Video
Most places are pretty good about sending unsubscribe links these days. However, I ran into a truly awful exception late last year with TaskEasy. For those who don't know, TaskEasy coordinates lawn care and similar services using independent contractors. I was happy with the service I received, and didn't even have to sign up for an account to order it. Then marketing emails started showing up. The unsubscribe link takes you to a login page, but since I never registered this means I have to create an account purely to opt out of spam emails. It's a really dark UI pattern and I'm disappointed in TaskEasy for implementing it.
The majority of modern anti-sex policies and mindsets stem from the same place. The Industrial Revolution. With the advent of factory-driven production, urban centers grew up and factory owners did not wish to pay adolescent workers a wage sufficient enough to enable them to support a family. Prior to this, they could apprentice and otherwise obtain jobs which paid enough to enable them to care for any children they produced.

This led to urban poor facing a real problem. Their adolescent children produced their own children, but the family as a whole did not earn enough to support them. So, people starved to death. This created a problem that faced both the religious and the secular authorities of the time. The solution they landed upon was to destroy sex. Considering other factors, this actually was mostly their only option. Sex was ever-present in the life of pre-industrialized groups. Homes were built with only 2 rooms generally, a kitchen and a common room where everyone slept and screwed. Abstinence was a superpower only saints (their version of comic book superheroes, and not seen as human) could do. So it wasn't easy.

But between doctors inventing horrific tales of the health dangers of masturbation and profligate sexual activity and the clergy literally rewriting scripture to oppose sexuality (the story of Onan being the clearest case), they did pretty well. Far worse than we have done ourselves since the mid 1990s (no one has ever been as prudish as a modern prude), but pretty well. They changed how homes were built, what entertainment was considered acceptable, changed acceptable dress, changed courting practices, changed parenting practices, and reorganized a great deal of how society in general functioned.

All so factory owners didn't need to pay adolescent workers a living wage. Things changed slowly enough that by the time we overcame all of the practical reasons that motivated the changes in the first place, most people didn't even know why they hated sex and the body so much. They just figured that was how it was. There was hope with the Sexual Revolution in the 1970s (on the back of the birth control pill which really should have seen most such ideas die off).... but that was killed by the 80s moralizer backlash, STDs, and the final nail staked in it with the pedo panic started in the 90s.

The sociology of sexuality is a tremendously fascinating topic and I've been following it for decades. There are certainly many who still bang the drum in an attempt to destroy or control one of the most fundamentally human bodily functions... and they make easy progress in a society as easily manipulated by emotional appeal as our own.
How much interaction is there, during, prior, or after election time, between the political or intelligence arms of the USA, and the politicians of any country in which the USA chooses to meddle in?

If we were so worried about the integrity of democracy, we wouldn't have our fingers in so many other ones. You've just described soft power.
Yes and no. The things we need to have open-source, like voting machines, automotive control systems and such, are extremely closed.
Bang for the Buck
I could never work on Windows. I'd just want to burn the whole thing to the ground and start over. There is no way an OS actually needs to be that massive; as helpfully illustrated by the comparison to Linux's metrics at the end.
600+ Million records:

"Name, Address, Email, Carrier, Line Type, Secondary Phone, Age, Gender, Household Income, Marital Status, Presence of Children, Home Owner Status, Home Market Value, Length of Residence, High Net Worth, Occupation, Education Level, Twitter Handle & Followers, Facebook Profile & Followers, LinkedIn Profile"
Ask HN: Any estimates on how much Y Combinator made on the Dropbox IPO
The question is whether the housing supply has increased faster than rent. The assertion that it’s too expensive to build low-rent apartments in a city where land is about as expensive as it gets us not unreasonable. I have seen little concrete that shows rent control helps supply in general.
For some reason there has been a common theme in some of the movies and TV shows I've been watching recently, where the characters are dealing with their own history and they or someone else declare that "you can't change the past". I found this wasn't sitting right with me.

People change the past all the time, for tons of reasons. But specific to this topic, a powerful tool in a therapist's toolbox is 'reframing', where you look at your experiences and find some new perspective. You change your narrative to have more compassion for yourself and the other players (or lay blame on someone more deserving) so that you can move past it now.

One aspect of that can be identifying that you had some special need that wasn't met. Or that your parents or siblings did. Everyone was trying but they weren't equipped to give you what you needed, and it was what it was. Especially for newly diagnosed conditions, your parents 20 years ago wouldn't have had access to the info you have now.

So a diagnosis can in some cases help people reframe all of this stuff.
The Wikipedia page for the eight-circuit model of consciousness explained what it was pretty well but presented no evidence or arguments in favor of it.

Do you know of any sources that that give such arguments?

I am also curious as to how state of the art physics fits into the rest of your list. I assume it's related to the eight-circuit model and opening yourself up to the possibility that there is more to the universe than that which has been explained by science, due to it's placement in the list, but I would be interested in knowing how those concepts relate in your mind.
Only because the golang core team seem to insist on reinventing every wheel either without considering prior art, or at least without considering why prior art went with a particular approach.

I swear I should put together a list of these instances.
It is misleading to fully assign spending outcomes to the sitting president-- Congress has far more control over spending than the White House. Clinton was anti-deficit but he also had the most conservative Congress in modern times after 1994 sending him appropriations bills. Obama had a similar dynamic after 2010. In both cases GOP Congresses imposed hard spending caps-- in fact, in 1994 they even clawed back spending from 1993.
We don't know the final price.
Wesify = We sell it for you. :-)
It's very difficult to be charitable toward this kind of philosophical dabbling. The most glaring absurdity is the performative contradiction of appealing to evolution and quantum mechanics to prove that the world is an illusion. If "the world" is an illusion, then we have evidence for neither evolution nor quantum mechanics. If evolution and quantum mechanics rob us of the possibility of knowing the world as it is, then we can't possibly appeal to evolution and quantum mechanics since, after all, we can't know them to be true. If evolution and/or quantum mechanics do indeed lead us toward these absurd conclusions, then clearly evolution and/or quantum mechanics are demonstrably false, and Hoffman would have deployed a successful reductio ad absurdum to show that at least one of them is. Instead, Hoffman destroys the very reality that made possible both the evidence and these theories in the first place. It's somewhat analogous to beginning with the premise that root 2 is rational, deducing a contradiction and then claiming that what you've shown is that numbers don't really exist.

Apart from that, neuroscience itself seems to suffer from a certain myopia about what it takes for granted, metaphysically speaking. The source of many of the problems in the philosophy of mind today have their origin in a lingering legacy of Descartes' mechanistic metaphysics in modern and contemporary thought. This legacy equally afflicts materialists who still cling to a Cartesian view of matter (in fact they're in even worse shape than dualists, having jettisoned what dualists use to account for things like color). If you want to make headway, this Cartesian legacy needs to be exorcised from our thinking. Otherwise, you'll keep collapsing back into Cartesian dualism, panpsychism or, worse, eliminativism.
A 1.3% margin of error is the difference over the entire time of wearing it.

It looks like on the first day, comparing blood glucose with FreeStyle Libre CGM, there was a significant difference in accuracy, with a lot more (~20% more) readings falling into "zone B", or "points that are outside of 20% but would not lead to inappropriate treatment" (chart https://www.liebertpub.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1089%2Fdi..., from paper https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/dia.2014.0378).

This is just one quick thing I found on Google Scholar.

Given that this CGM can also act as a regular fingerprick blood glucose monitor during that 12 hour overlap, I think the FDA likely wanted to err on the safer side of using well known and well tested methods for monitoring to avoid any unexpected issues. Is there sufficient evidence of the benefit of CGM over fingerprick tests to believe that this caution could cause actual harm?
Not an expert on them myself, but I have links to articles discussing those libraries and the various ways to style React apps (plain CSS, CSS Modules, CSS-in-JS, and inline styles) in the "React Styling" section of my React/Redux links list: https://github.com/markerikson/react-redux-links/blob/master...
While I definitely believe that the motivation behind this latest media surge is suspect, do you really think people aren't justified in being upset about Facebook's abuse? Maybe the outrage is simply because Facebook was new and people weren't aware of the dangers in 2008 and 2012?

People don't have to be "damaged" by something to object to it. How do human rights abuses in third world countries "damage" you, exactly? Just because there isn't a direct link doesn't mean that there's nothing bad going on.

I myself don't care that this data was used to help Donald Trump ascend to the presidency -- besides, I bet that Hilary's campaign did similar sketchy things with private data. The issue is that our private data is being abused by a company that misled us about data use -- and for folks who don't even have a Facebook account, whose information has been harvested via shadow profiles sourced from our less-privacy-conscious friends, data compilation occurred entirely without consent.

This reeks of whataboutism to me. Why are you trying to imply that we shouldn't be concerned about privacy?
There are disorders besides ASD, that share or overlap in some of the traits, and also cause distress.
My HP WiFi Won't Turn On? Solution to Turn on Wifi – Onenaija Blog
you replied to yourself. confused indeed.

Anyway, I don't know why the language I used matters. You knew what I meant and had to be pedantic. My second point was more important.
Good to see this on HN. I'm waiting for an explanation that uses category theory to arrive at a conclusion.
Rust is good but not great. Being able to import two major versions of a lib into the same compilation unit (am I understanding this correctly?) is a huge win. Rust can have transitive deps that only differ by version number, but they can't come in contact with each other (don't cross the versions).

Reread the post, the authors make some great, mature realizations that I hope other languages will listen to. I don't use the language, but I use languages that Go has affected and this is a great thing.
It’s regrettable that our culture has decided that neurological diversity should be understood in terms of abnormality = deficiency. It would be nice to have a more inclusive society that adapted its norms to the way people really are rather than always trying to adapt people to somewhat arbitrary norms.
"It's okay because you weren't personally affected" is so obviously wrong. It's so obviously against the spirit of the law and of society. I find it hard to imagine you're arguing in good faith.

But how about this, then, since you're so intent on making this political? How about we fix this so that no future politicians can benefit from this kind of targeted advertising - both liberal and conservative?
Senate Judiciary Committee Summons Facebook, Google, Twitter CEOs