skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this is a really fair and balanced way of looking at it.

The key political question could perhaps be stated as, how do you balance the median vs. the mean? A society which focuses on maximum efficiency will almost certainly have higher inequality, but also higher average wealth.

I think it's up to each region/nation to navigate this tradeoff. I do worry that the current political climate in the US really underweights the gains from trade, though. We've had 30-40 years of the most open trade regime in human history and it's raised the US standard of living immensely. I hear people all the time saying, well the median income isn't going up, but that ignores (a) how many things are free today (e.g. Gmail) and (b) how much healthcare prices have escalated (which is paid by firms, absorbing cash that might otherwise flow directly to employees as wages). I think people today actually have it quite good. I'm afraid we might take for granted what got us here and shoot ourselves in the foot with all this protectionist sentiment.
>Please excuse the very minimal design, but after writing a lot of Single Page Applications I wanted to go the oposite way and write a website with less than 25KB.

The world could use more of this.

I took the simple quiz and my first question was from the Russian language site. I hadn't considered that Markov chains could work in other languages too. I wonder if there are any significant differences?
I appreciate your POV. I tried to communicate that this wasn't a case of sour grapes. I don't have any ill will toward Zapier. I will try to be more explicit about that next time I leave a similar comment.

There are many valid and plausible reasons that they could've chosen not to move forward in the interview process: maybe they got to another hireable candidate before they even seriously considered my application, maybe there is some specific technical need that I clearly don't meet and which I'm not picking up on from the job description, maybe something else.

And I can't see anyone else in the candidate pool either; while I'm good at things, undoubtedly there is a non-trivial quantity of people who are better. Candidates are compared and contrasted against the pool of other applicants; if there is someone else whose qualifications blow mine out of the water, or who is technically comparable but much cheaper, then who can blame Zapier for taking the obviously-superior option? I can't see the other applicants, so I can't know whether or not there was a slam-dunk applicant who made the merely "great" applicants pale in comparison.

Even if I'm highly qualified and there isn't anyone clearly superior in a comparable price range, people often can't quantify a firm rational basis for their specific preferences between candidates (and this becomes even more apparent once you're on the other side of the table).

This is when the infamous "culture fit" is broken out. I was once told that I had been passed over because I "wasn't assertive enough" after I spent most of an interview blasting the use of MySQL in a specific industrial application. There's no way that note wasn't intended as passive-aggressive retaliation. :P

Recently I was dismissed from a candidate pool because my answer to "Tell me about a time you resolved a problem with a colleague" hadn't been rehearsed to the satisfaction of the interviewer, who was one of those "I'm technical because I read WIRED and like being nerdy" types. That is just a different preference in technical depth as far as I'm concerned. Technically strong people are going to worry about technical interview content and focus on that rather than their answers to tired cliches.

Sometimes even things that seem trivial or silly can be a bigger impediment in context. For example, my first name is Jeff. I know of at least a couple of gigs that I've lost solely because there were already 3 or more Jeffs involved in the work on a daily basis and they didn't want to make the situation worse! "Jeff" is a somewhat common name but it's not super common -- sometimes I wonder how frequently this happens to Johns or Steves.

tl;dr it's just impossible to know whether a hiring decision is justified or not without having the insider dialogue and insight, and even then, don't expect stellar rationale. As bryanh said elsewhere upthread, hiring is a messy process.
I think Amazon has gotten too big. From an online bookstore to near monopoly domination.
They just moved to github so maybe time will be measured in months instead of decades.
Could you provide more specific examples of "what was happening everywhere else"?

An animal doesn't know if it is being raised for experimentation or food. They are simply being treated cruelly until they are slaughtered. They may even be leading a better life if they are being raised for experimentation than for slaughter. We on the other hand are trying to wipe our conscious clean by rationalizing the reasons behind the slaughter and putting food over knowledge. We don't need to eat meat to survive or thrive, so saying "but it is for food" holds no higher a moral ground than "but it is for an experiment".
"if you are going to be more permissive in what people can legally acquire, I think that we have a moral obligation to provide intervention and support services for individuals affected by substance abuse. I don’t see a lot of people actually talking about this aspect of decriminalization in the US."

Actually most people involved in the activism and policy front talk about this all the time. Some examples include citing the portugal diversion panels following decriminalization or the safe injection sites and needle exchange sites in the czech republic again following decriminalization there or insite/onsite the colocated safe injection site and rehab center in vancouver as models for the US to follow for harm reduction.

In addition other people in the US are making harm reduction fact based high school drug education curricula as a way to educate people about drugs.
I was under the impression that few historians actually agree with the story of Galileo being imprisoned for pushing Heliocentricity. I recall reading that by that point heliocentrism wasn’t controversial and Galileo’s house arrest came as a result of a combination of errors in his own work and his personal conflicts with the pope.

What’s more, I believe I’ve read that most of the “conflict” between religion and science has been overblown. The environment of opposition we sometimes see today didn’t really begin to manifest itself until the 19th and 20th centuries.
Nielsen and Chuang is still canonical, albeit a little out of date. Has all the basics, and it's extremely well written.
Read the comment by "Someone". The rest of the world was playing on both sides of the table, since Kasporov was reading their analysis during the game.
Care to share a link? I’m interested in community software and how the market will evolve to serve these groups.
I'm not an expert on this, but offhand I don't see anything fundamentally different between the capabilities of Lua and the capabilities of Python, Perl, Ruby, JavaScript, and other widespread scripting languages.

So why isn't there a PythonJIT, PerlJIY, RubyJIT, etc., comparable to LuaJIT?
What's a good replacement for Java that has static typing and tool support? Is there one yet?
If you’re interested, here are some of Chuck’s thoughts on Amazon: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/4/24/okay-lets-talk...
I don't doubt that Kazcynski was highly intelligent, but I would be careful of throwing out IQ scores like that. It very much depends on the test. More to the point, I believe that both Wechsler and Stanford-Binet have a maximum score of 160, so a number like 167 is not possible and meaningless with some of the most commonly used tests. Intelligence tests are normed and it's difficult to have enough data to do that properly on the the tails. Further, a good diagnostician uses the results of an intelligence test to determine areas of strength and weakness, so while the overall score is used to satisfy the legal criteria for children when placing into special education, it's not the only criteria.

tldr: Most modern tests stop at 160, so 167 is not possible in that context. If another test generated that score, then it's difficult to compare it against modern test scores since they have a different cap.
I would say, to firm that up even more, every school can point to their accomplishments, and the graduates/professors that worked on them, as to why they are in rarified air. You can look through Wikipedia at all of these renowned scientists, and who their advisors were, and who their students were. So you can say they stood on the shoulders of giants, and also stood tall for others to perch even higher.

But not a single one of those heroes of science should rightly be remembered primarily or even secondarily because of where they studied.

The underlying fallacy is that you can only learn the best skills from the best people in a short window if time in your early adulthood.
Let's play your fantasy out for a minute. Imagine I hire a large and good enough team of engineers to duplicate any feature in the enterprise edition and contribute it within a day of being released, to the community edition.

Do you believe Oracle or anyone will accept that?

Because if not, that's a clear problem.

(FWIW I strongly doubt they would be okay with this)
If you think management is only common sense, then paying 500 bucks an hour for MBA grads is ridiculously.

Using that logic, either the CEO is stupid, or the company employees are utterly incompetent and lacks common sense.

Or, more likely,

a) there's some science/skills behind management that can be learned at school even by non experienced people;

b) those young MBA people worked 60/70 hours per week for 3/4 years being part of a team reporting directly to the C-level executives of Fortune 500 corps, solving quite complex problems.
Assuming so, there’s [result for a in input_data for result in [f(a)] if result] if you’ve just gotta make it a comprehension.
I flagged this comment because it reads as flamebait and off-topic to me.

If it were worded as "I've heard that some artists use drugs to aid in the creative process, but I think Japan has strict drug laws.... does that practice happen in Japan?" that would be a way to actually start a discussion about a subject.

As is, it's not providing a useful starting point for a discussion and, IMO, it's most likely to start a totally off topic and factually-devoid discussion of shouting back and forth about whether weed makes someone more creative or not.
Why is it called "auto-pilot"? It should be "auto-COpilot"
I worked for a startup that raised money 4 times, over 50 million, before they found product market fit. So while it’s very important, it’s clearly not impossible to keep going if you believe you can find product market fit eventually.
Is this available on any websites that don't require Javascript to view?

(Seriously folks, there's no reason a static site like this should need JS enabled to read, except for tracking purposes.)
If you want to make it really fast you could steal some ideas from: https://wincent.com/blog/optimization (tales of many years of optimizing a fuzzy search implementation).
I’d be fascinated if you could find three examples of panel gaps needing 40% improvement over one year from a major manufacturer.
Not impacting other people isn't the sole criteria. It's also not the correct premise: not initiating violence and or traditional crime upon other people is the criteria, not a vague 'do not negatively impact other people in any manner.' Libertarian-leaning thought in regards to social liberty does not argue that you should/can have no negative impact whatsoever. It argues you are to not initiate violence upon others.

Legalization and decriminalization are also the sole rational alternatives, broadly, to prohibition. We've tried prohibition every possible way across two generations, and have spent truly vast sums of money attempting it all. It was an extreme and total failure without exception.

Legalization & decriminalization have a minimum of three very strong arguments in their favor. Each of the arguments alone decimates the prohibition argument. These three arguments encompass nearly every spetrum politically, except for most of the very far right traditional wing of old conservatism.

Argument one: it's your body, as an adult liberty means you largely have a right to do with it as you see fit. The government should err to the side of staying out of my life. That's the more libertarian, government leave me alone, argument. Even conservatives should universally go for this one, however they betray the principles they pretend to believe in here.

Argument two: the obvious dollars & cents argument. It's radically more cost effective to treat people with addiction or mental health problems. It's not cost effective to put them in prison at a cost of $40,000 per year (a million dollars over ~25 years). It's also not cost effective to maintain a police state system that costs hundreds of billions of dollars per year. It's like maintaining a second military. That money should be going into healthcare, infrastructure, education, job training. This is another argument on which a lot of conservatives betray their claimed principles: what's more anti small government than a giant bureaucratic police state system? It also destroys the economic value of the person put into prison, making them a non-contributing person and dependent on big government: another thing that should remove conservatives from supporting the prohibition approach.

Argument three: compassion. It's illiberal and very cruel to put a non-violent offender into prison for 15 or 30 years out of their life (drug addicts are often repeatedly arrested), for drug use or drug addiction problems. You know your premise about the opioid lady (or anyone like that in general)? Putting her in prison repeatedly, disappears her from the child's life as well, at a very high cost to society and the child. With the treatment approach, you at least have an opportunity that the parent can be present. It's worth noting here that prohibition does not stop overdoses, it amplifies the lethality of the situation by pushing overdoses into the darkness.
Historically those towns were most likely built around a common economic interest; intersection of trade routes, mining, logging, etc. The town was created because the people were already there. As far as I know artificial communities don't seem very resilient. I guess 10,000 telecommuting programmers could support a pretty robust economy, but it sounds like a bit of a pipe dream, honestly.
Sign up to mailing list ?
If you think it has failed - it has failed.
The founder is the only one who can continue and if you can't then you shouldn't.
"World's oldest spider discovered in Australian outback" is misleading. Scientists have been following the spider since birth and she recently died.

>the research is the life’s work of Barbara York Main, now 88, who first set eyes on Number 16 shortly after its birth. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/04/27/farewell-no-1...

>The female Giaus Villosus, or trapdoor spider — Number 16, as she was known to researchers — met her maker in October, after being attacked by a parasitic wasp in Western Australia’s Central Wheatbelt

...

>This is how she did it – in 1974, she mapped out the burrows of several dozen spiders living in a segment of bushland reserve near her family farm.

>“I wanted to know how long the spiders lived, and whether there was any difference between male and female maturation.” She’s observed that the male leaves his burrow at maturity, around seven to nine years old, to wander in search of a mate, after which he dies. The female stays put, raising hatchlings inside the protection of her burrow, which she temporarily seals up with a mud plug. She lives on, and on…

>“I’ve got one spider from the original cohort that’s still alive,” she adds. I do a quick calculation – if she first found it in 1974, that would mean the spider is forty or so years old? “Yes.” http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/ba...

The farm is near https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammin,_Western_Australia by the way

More on Ms Main https://phys.org/news/2015-02-lifelong-spiderwoman.html
https://nethack.org/v361/release.html
Your theory sounds good until you consider the practical aspects of the last step:

> Be careful not to burn them. Repeat

So what do you do with the wood? A billion years ago, your plan would have worked out brilliantly. Some say it's where our oil came from. But now we have fungus among us that evolved to rapidly turn your wood right back into CO2.

Unless you sterilize the wood and bury it deep in the ground where it will never be exposed to air or spores, you're right back to square one. Also there's the logistics and carbon footprint of burying and sterilizing the wood.

You're not the first person to think of this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2266747/
Sorry, this still seems like a completely different situation to me. Depression was already there.

Heavy addiction: you have X problems, you escape via addiction, now you have X+addiction problems, you stop, you still have X+addiction+withdrawal.

Hobby: you have X problems, you find something that helps you with depression, you have X-1 problems, you stop, you have X problems again.
Or even better, active lane control/assist, but of course Tesla is all about marketing to the hilt. If the “Gigafactory” were being honest it would be, “Panasonic with a Tesla sicker.”
I do this with the ExpressCard slot on my ThinkPad, not because I'm paranoid but because I like to experiment with many OSs and it's easier to manage than messing with partitions and bootloaders. I appreciate how the ExpressCard SSDs don't stick out of the laptop at all. I keep all my user data on the internal drive though (encrypted), so my risk to unattended laptop hijinks isn't much mitigated.
Getting a LOT of emails from interested programmers. Woot! Please get in touch for non-programmer roles too (documentation, clinical, infra, ui, design, etc)
It's because so many people don't know, forgot, or choose to ignore that the US was founded on enlightenment principles of individualism. So they always say stuff about some amorphous "social contract" to focus on what is essentially thought-crime, saying "let's stop them before they do the thing that then induces them to commit the crime" instead of just prosecuting them for the crime.

Talking like this frames the narrative and too many of us let these anti-american rhetorical tricks pass without calling it out.

The government has no right to tell me what I can and can't put in my body, whether that's lettuce, Devils lettuce, a cigar, or a soda... doesn't matter.

It's a matter of individual freedom.
Well if you're really paranoid that's the point where you get a new laptop.
If I call something “Elephant scale” and then claim I meant “an elephant’s hair” you’d laugh at me, and rightly so.
I'd like to plug DCSS here:

https://crawl.develz.org/

I could never get into any other roguelikes, but I LOVE Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. I easily have over 100 hours in it, and just recently finished an actual game for the first time (15 runes, Gargoyle Hunter).
The figures aren't remotely presented, and if you think they are you went in looking for a narrative.

The "mall" in question is in the middle of a suburb. The "subsidy" of infrastructure that was required regardless seems spurious. Further, both areas "required the city to pay for all the aforementioned services". For that matter, maintaining roads and water/sewage in dense areas is dramatically more expensive than less dense areas.

"even now, post dis-investment, the downtown generates $344k tax and the mall $120k tax"

The article quotes current, failed mall taxes. After most tenants have moved out and the mall is in disarray. Secondly, saying that a 9 block area of mixed retail/commerce pays more taxes than a single mall seems outrageously laughable.

The word "subsidy" almost always appears in articles fomenting nonsense to pander to prejudices. The correlation between it and articles of little actual value is about 1.0.
It's because so many people don't know, forgot, or choose to ignore that the US was founded on enlightenment principles of individualism.

Unless you were a child, woman, native, or a slave, right? It also helped to own land.

Come on, we can be against prohibition for practical reasons without resorting to pining for a history which never existed,
You might want to seek out some folks at Crowdcompass or other companies in your general category and see if they want to hire your whole team, maybe even pay you to continue doing what you're doing... that's kind of a middle option. If you decide not to move forward I'd be glad to consider you for a job at our company because I respect how you're handling this. Whatever you do I wish you the best of luck. If you'd like to chat I'm at... dave <at>sendsmart.com.
--HaXor 1337--
emojis are text “body language”

edit: hacker news filtered them and now the nuance of my message was lost!
Some sense of touch/pressure/temperature as the skin does, perhaps?

Consider how we can feel physical sensations in dreams without any physical source, or “phantom limbs” that amputees are sometimes said to feel.
Euthanasia isn’t legal many places and life as a brain is probably not for everyone.
How do you communicate with it or know what it wants. How does that get into a legal document. There is little about it that is comparable with a normal human existence.
> what does a brain do with absolutely no external stimulus at all?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream
I think you hit it on the head. Buy it, rent it out, wipe all your taxable profit (or at least most of it) with depreciation, and then 1031 your way into higher and higher places.

You'll have zero basis on xx million of real estate if you do this correctly, and have paid little income tax along the way from the rents. My old commercial landlord did this and probably owns like 30 mid-size buildings in Oakland.
Criminalizing the supply chain has disadvantages, too. The government loses sales tax revenue and criminal organizations make large profits. Quality isn't controlled and is often dangerously polluted (e.g., fentanyl being sold as heroin).

Also, not all drug users are addicts.
Wisdom of the crowds works when you're able to pool a large number of independent, unbiased estimates to produce a distribution. If the crowd communicates, it is no longer independent. This produces a distribution weighted towards the answers of loudest or most persuasive fraction, which is probably going to be less accurate.

In fact, communication between crowd members in many cases significantly reduces the quality of the answers. This has been clearly demonstrated in studies of group brainstorming, where the number and quality of ideas is significantly better when group members come up with ideas independently and pool them at the end than when they come up with ideas together.
That won't help while crossing borders, who would want to open the bag without necessarily tampering with it.
>And try to reduce your absurd burn rate.

when we started we had 3 employees. we carried 3 employees for 3 months at which point we went down to 1 employee and myself. it is only as of last month that i'm the sole employee of the company (and obv the burn has gone down proportionately)
Sounds like you need to talk with these users.
I have a feeling that this would be much easier to understand using trigonometry. For a unit hypothenuse, you're trying to maximise sin(θ) + cos(θ), which is the case when θ = τ/8, giving √2.

Given that we cut a corner, the longest possible value for the original problem is √2.

If we want the proportion cut, we get (1 - 1/√2) ≅ 0.3
A Charming Proposal of the Functional Stack
Show HN: Reddit domain leaderboard