skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Because the 10th provides little that is particularly concrete, and because the prevailing interpretation of other clauses has been fairly broad. That is to say, by and large the federal government has been acting withing the powers granted by the constitution, but at the moment those powers are held to be quite broad. Interstate commerce clause, in particular, means that the government can do quite a bit to regulate, so long as it is in some manner related to interstate trade. I don't personally agree with these interpretations, but they are the prevailing ones.

Likewise, incorporation doctrine is derived from the constitution. So anything that is considered barred by incorporation is therefore "prohibited by it[the constitution] to the States".

It has, in the past, been called "a truism" by the courts, and that's not a totally unreasonable read. Still, there issue has come up in court from time to time, and the wikipedia page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_... ) lists some examples.
You have the absolute right to say what you want, and the words you say to your target in your threat are not punishable. That is what free speech means in the US.

However, the act of threatening someone is punishable, and it does not matter whether they are a politician or an ordinary person. What matters is that you committed the act of threatening to kill someone, and that is a crime regardless of the medium or act through which the threat is conveyed.
I would say harm vs. not harm is much less subjective than direct harm vs. indirect harm. Is yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater direct or indirect harm? Defining that seems much trickier than just defining whether it's harm.
Preserving and playing classic point-and-click adventure games with ScummVM
Maybe it's because I'm in the 50+ age category, but I think tips are confusing for a different reason. Yes, of course, it's trivial to calculate a percentage of an amount. The confusion is in deciding what percentage to give.

15% - 20% is standard, and always has been, for a full service, sit down restaurant. The tip makes some sense, based on the service given to you, some level of tip being roughly commensurate with the amount of service.

But what percentage am I supposed to tip in a restaurant where I order at a counter, bus my own table, and merely have someone bring the order to my table? (FWIW, some McDonalds now do this, yet nobody would ever tip at McDonalds.) What about if they come around and fill my water? What if I order at a counter but they still bus my table?

Moreover, in many places (coffee shops, ice cream shops) there is no wait service at all, the person at the counter merely draws a coffee or scoops some ice cream, yet tips are apparently still expected. Am I really supposed to tip 15% just for someone to scoop me an ice cream cone? Which leads me to another question that has bothered me since way back in the day: Why are bartenders tipped so richly simply for pouring a drink?

15-20% has long been standard for full-service. For lesser service I don't understand why anybody would be expected to tip the same amount. Am I missing something? I gather the younger generation might not think of things in these terms, but why not?
Facial recognition CEO: software is not ready for use by law enforcement
Heh, that's very true, but I think that the predictions I've gotten wrong actually tend to err on the side of being too conservative about the future rather than too radical, or of betting on the wrong horse between radical alternatives. I was skeptical of the WWW at first ("Gopher is better organized"), continued to use Eudora and then Outlook right up until GMail came out ("you have to be online to read your e-mail?"), and still don't really get what's so great about Facebook (LiveJournal was better in just about every way, and basically every feature that Google+ forced Facebook into implementing was actually cribbed from LJ a decade before).

I think there's a cognitive bias somewhere about people preferring the mental model they already hold over some unknown future. Realistically, pretty much the only thing you can be certain of is that the future will not be the same as today, it's just that picking between many different futures gives you terrible odds of selecting the right one. It seems like your options are assuming that the status quo will continue, which is guaranteed wrong, vs. choosing between multiple competing alternate futures, where you are most likely wrong.
The study I linked to looks at nothing but the cost of dealing with intermittency and comes to the conclusion that it's barely more expensive than the current system.

Also, once you go into the developing world context a lot of things change. What is difficult and expensive in the European context is to guarantee the last few hours of electricity a year. If you can take an area that has a few hours of electricity a week to that point, you have a massive win already. Plus you can build sector coupling in from the beginning.

In a green field scenario you _really_ want wind/solar as a decentral bootstrapping technology that scales down, that can get you a really long way.

Bangladesh has >5 million solar home systems installed. That's a Norway or a Denmark population running 100% on decentral off-grid solar.

Edit:

An important point here is to be aware of time horizons. A study looking at a 2025 or a 2030 system looks very different from one that looks at a 2050 system. If the foreseeable future means the next ten years, then sure.
I would much rather drop something i had no interest in and pick up other interests and maybe later pick it up when interest flows there again, than be forced to wade trhough the hopelessness that is to sit a good portion of your day, learning something you hate. Schooling HAS wasted a lot of my lifetime, on things I HATED. Years on, I still resent this. I also dropped out of guitar after 1 week when I was young, but now, having rediscovered it in university, I do it with a renewed appreciation and vigour.I want it now. Now, not then. And that's just fine.
Depends on the definition of "doctor".

The likes of INTERNIST, CADUCEUS, and MYCIN have been around and provably accurate starting in the late 70s through the mid-80s. MYCIN even arguably sparked the 1st AI boom. But there were ethical issues with computer-aided diagnosis that I'm not sure have been solved/overcome.

Perhaps the current startup generation can get past them with Zuckerberg, Kalanick and Holmes as role models. :)
This feels like a troll.
I view it as less of a competition than as projects working on different parts of the same problem - ITER seems to be working more on the problems of managing a fusion reaction (materials, procedures, shielding, etc.), while using a better-studied containment design with lower technical risk. Meanwhile, Wendelstein is ignoring all those other challenges in order to study an alternate containment design in isolation.
curl -O https://oxy-secure.app/oxy
chmod +x oxy
./oxy --help

All the signs of a security conscious developer.
...and perhaps a little too subtle. Or maybe just not funny enough to be apparent.
C# supports operator overloading but not custom operators. That means vectors get to use the plus operator for addition, but no Scalaesque ~~/ operators.

C# is not a language that is generally criticized for operator soup like the ones that support custom operators.
oh no. but the matrix was only a film. this sounds like cryptodeity.
What a weird story. So Mercer plays some home-brewed game based on politics. Who cares?
Those all can cause issues. Allowing mostly foreign companies to own the majority of a country's economic sector can turn out quite bad. In fact, it has happened in history with banana republics.
Perhaps the next thing will be large scale consumerism exhaustion. Consumers not getting the same thrill out of a new car or the latest iDevice that they used to stop buying so much new stuff. Not for ecological or ideological reasons but just out of boredom or exhaustion of the consumer cycle. Even fashion trends seem to be slowing down with less and less reason to buy a new wardrobe as often.
Is there any logic whatsoever in talking about the intersection of AI and crypto (or AI and blockchain)? It seems to me that this intersection is very close to the empty set.
With any luck (sorry), the crash happens just prior to Election Day.
Asking yourself questions is part of being curious. If you can't figure it out, expressing your lack of knowledge takes courage.
I'm more interested in the design choices behind her looks.

Why asian, why freckles? Why those facial proportions?

This can't just be one artists preference. There has to be business decisions behind it all of it.

Optimizing breast size for success on Instagram, is a design meeting I would love to listen in on!
The existence of a positive net result is not sufficient justification for a poor, inefficient, or wasteful process that led to that result.
> Are you really going to read through every single directory in node_modules/ to make sure you know exactly what you're running?

Of course we are.

Not manually, of course, but we've got automated tools that generate a report of every dependency, including transitive dependencies, and its license and version, for all the platforms we use. We definitely keep an eye on these reports.

"But it's haaaaarrrrd" isn't a great excuse for letting things get out of control. We're developers. Taking obnoxious labor-intensive manual processes and making them quick and easy is the entire reason why our profession exists in the first place.

(Granted, the fact that a single import can bring in hundreds or even thousands of transitive dependencies to worry about is a big reason why I avoid the Node ecosystem like the plague. So there is that.)
Civil Forfeiture is essentially "guilty until proven innocent." And I don't mean that hyperbolically, I mean literally if the state takes property or cash under Civil Forfeiture you have to prove your property innocent to get it returned (via expensive civil litigation).

That means that they can seize property or cash under a certain value with near impunity because the cost of recovering it is greater than the cost of the goods themselves. This makes it a fantastic tool against the poor, since they'll have no real remedies.

You only really started to hear about Civil Forfeiture once the police started going too far and taking things from the wealthy or powerful, but they've been at this for years, take vehicles from accused but un-prosecuted "drug dealers."
> Seeing "domain-contacts.txt" reminded how much simpler the internet used to be. Imagine not being afraid of giving out your contact info to the whole internet!

ARPA (well, the ARPANET NIC at SRI) maintained a printed book of everyone (who wanted to be listed) on the ARPANET: name, phone number, mail address, physical address. The first one was about 1/2 an inch thick, the second one (around 1978 or 79?) about twice that...and then after that they gave up. I think I still have mine someplace.

(ARPA changed their name to DARPA at some point for reasons unknown to me)
If you can fix distributed trust you could probably reshape global trade however you see fit. Lack of systemic trust creates mountains of complexity to deal with -- look at how many parties have to be involved just to have a product manufactured in another country
I come from the other side of the argument: since there's so much money poured into cryptocurrencies, so many talents spending their days working on it, huge companies like Goldman Sachs saying that it's the future then what's taking so long?

I'm not even asking for a killer app at this point, just for a compelling argument of what the future of a blockchain-powered world will look like. I don't think I'm a "know-it-all" just for asking for a tangible explanation which doesn't revolve around a bunch of hand-waving or technically, socially and economically ridiculous statements such as "imagine Facebook but it's the blockchain".

Blockchain is not the magic device people make out to be, it's a cool hack but so far its practical use cases are rather limited. And if you think I'm a know-it-all for saying that I'm sure that you'll easily be able to shame me for the fraud that I am by pointing out the multiple problems that can be solved by the Blockchain more efficiently than with good old technology. So far all I have is "buying illegal stuff online" and "selling illegal stuff online". For everything else there's PostgreSQL.

People compare blockchain and cryptocurrencies to the internet or cell phones but I think it's completely disingenuous. While I'm sure you could find plenty of naysayers back then who failed to understand the scope of what the internet would become and how revolutionary it was at the very least easy to see what it brought to the table. You could communicate with anybody around the world, play games, maybe even buy stuff. You can argue about how important and valuable that is, but at least the potential is clear.

When you read these Blockchain pamphlets it feels like they're trying to convert them to their religion or political movement. It's about user experiences and decentralization and building blocks of trust. It's about the power of software and the encoding of human thought. And VR and AR for some reason.

I say that's just bullshit.
40000 1000 100000 500
Perhaps the post PC era did not arrive in your immediate bubble, however I assure you it happened.

There are whole parts of non first world societies where laptops are not a thing and everything is done on phones and tablets.
I think they mean the first thing they target is your privacy.
DSM is the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders [0]. This is the reference text that describes and classifies mental disorders

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Man...
You can do the same thing without blockchain.
See below, to be precise, in

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17396176

That's my first description of the work on HN. Now I want to rush to an alpha test, to be announced on HN.
I think people who don't prefer Docker find it hard to articulate what is wrong with it.

To me it is really a question of, how do you vet software before you use it ? Will you take the time to understand your stack before it's deployed? When you employ certain abstractions, how much visibility do you lose ? Is it worth it ?

Docker is fine as one of many alternatives, but to turn your nose up at well written, battle tested software which is part of most Linux distro's is a little crazy. I would definitely bet that people who chose to learn how cgroups work, how systemd works will see their skills age more gracefully.

It reminds me of Dev-ops candidates that I have interviewed that laugh at the idea of ssh-ing to deploy a new version of code, without understanding that Ansible is generally doing the same.
Golang: using build tags to store configurations
I think minimum wages do three things.

1. Flattens the wage curve. More money goes to the bottom end and less to the top. Given economists penchant to complain the distribution doesn't matter it's interesting that that freaks them out.

2. Low paying jobs are very likely in industries where employers have more bargaining power than workers. Minimum wages correct for that.

3. Increasing labor costs motivates employers to invest in increasing productivity which leads to better long term economic growth.
The Supremacy clause of the constitution means that state law can’t be contrary to the constitution. So if the 8th amendment applies in this case, the state law is overruled.
I’m curious about a related question for people who have been around a bit (or are just generally knowledgeable). How should your average retirement investor react when reading about the market like this? I’ve been well-educated on staying the course, markets will dip etc. But I entered the market with some force at the depths of the last recession so it’s been very easy to take this advice. Now it feels like sitting on a railroad track waiting to get smooshed by an oncoming train because it’s “the right thing to do”.
...your math is wrong, so maybe it's not that easy after all
Mozilla has wasted a bunch of resources creating a pointless tool. Let me explain why!

Last year, they promised to create an add-on that triggered when you visited sites known to have been breached in the past, and let the user check if his password was included in the leaked data, via HIBP: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/firefox-will-...

Now, they announced Firefox Monitor, which is nothing but a standalone website where you can check your email and see if it's been included in public breaches. This is the same functionality of the main HIBP website. If people want to check if their email was included in a breach, they'd just visit HIBP, not Firefox Monitor.

Why does this website exist in the first place? They took a good idea that used a proactive approach to alerting users of potentially leaked passwords and they've created a Firefox-branded HIBP clone website that very few people are gonna know about or even use.

Pointless use of resources, when they could have used them for something actually useless.
I also notice that is the cost for renting in both places. If you want to buy a house, and if (for example) you wanted that house to have a yard, it might impact that differential. But, interesting site, thanks!
The best thing I've seen blockchains used for, besides currency, is as an integration platform for a non-centralized supply chain. There's really no money in it, since there aren't any gatekeepers, but that's sort of the point.

The idea is that the farmer picks his carrots, puts them in a box and sends them off to the carrot juice guy. When he does this he puts a upc code on the side of the carrot box and then puts the code into the blockchain as I shipped this thing to the carrot juice guy. Carrot juice guy receives carrot juice, makes carrot juice with carrots in box and then says, I used these carrots to make this juice in these 300 bottles. <Blockchain> Ships it to distributor. Distributor says I received these carrot juice shipments. <Blockchain> I then sold 1-30 to convenience store A <Blockchain>. End consumer bought one at 3:30pm and got sick. You have the record of how it got there and how much time it spent everywhere, etc. The thing here is there is no centralized supply chain company who controls everything, everyone just puts it on the blockchain that NO ONE OWNS. This is a net gain for everybody in the network, but there is no centralized profit there, except for maybe some systems integrators working at the edges.

This is why blockchain will probably be this kind of subtle thing that doesn't make anybody a lot of money, but just seeps into industry over time. It's a bit like containerization in a way. Huge global impact, but not really any one company who made their fortune on the container technology itself, but all the companies around it benefited.
The goal is to assist the human in translating C code to safe Rust code. Getting to unsafe Rust code as an automated first step saves a lot of work.
But it's not wrong, in expectation given long term past trends. It's just leveraged investment using a vehicle for leverage that has some tax and refinancing advantages that favor the borrower, not to mention the liquidity advantages. There are very rational reasons to do this.

For any investor, there is a point in the mortgage interest rate vs risk-adjusted returns space at which investing is better. That point may differ, of course.
The colloquial definition used by most of the US citizenry and on television news programs on both 24-hour cable networks and broadcast television.

That doesn't make that definition correct...
You really haven't explained what "on the blockchain" means and how it helps any of these situations.

"voting ... on the blockchain" This just sounds like the hype that parent was talking about.

Maybe all of this means something in your head, but the way it reads is the same as when companies file patents for "Doing ${THING}, but on the internet", as if that categorically changes the thing.
Meanwhile, in Paris, the electric car sharing scheme comes to an end:

https://www.thelocal.fr/20180619/wheels-set-to-come-off-pari...

There are many factors for why this is so, not making money being the problem. This is a story that investors in today's EV 'sharing' companies may find prescient.
here's a copy of HOSTS.TXT from 1982 and 1983:

https://emaillab.jp/dns/hosts/

and from 1985: https://emaillab.jp/pub/hosts/19850322/HOSTS.TXT
It means that anything not expressly prohibited in the constitution is up to the states to decide.

What most people don't get (even in the USA) is that the constitution doesn't grant powers to people. It only restricts the government from acting on the people. People were born with the right to speak freely and defend themselves as they see fit - the government can't change that for example.

So the 10th says if it isn't mentioned it is a power that belongs to the people or the states. For example, weed isn't mentioned in the constitution so technically it's a 10th issue for states to decide - HOWEVER - this is thing called the commerce clause...

Commerce clause means that if something moves from state to state, that sure does seem like a Federal matter. So it gets complicated. But... In the end, some states have legalized in the state in part referring to 10A, it's their right to do - but if you are in a "weed state" and light up at a DEA office - expect to be arrested and charged with a federal crime.

* The thing about commerce clause is that almost everything can move from state to state. So that's a little bit of an annoying topic depending on the issue and which side you're on. For example, I can manufacture a gun in my state that isn't legal in another state, commerce clause has been tried to limit 2A.
Privileged? You think journalists are privileged? Are they clothed in money and power?
Minimum wage is debtor's prison redux: if you don't produce enough, you're not allowed to produce anything at all.

And some jobs just don't entail that much productivity.
I approximate a 20% tip by rounding up the (post-tax) total to the next $5 increment and then dividing by 5, e.g. $123.45 bill -> $25 tip.

Alternately, in cities with ~8-10% sales tax, you can double the sales tax and round up.
lol tell that to china
Can you specify what that is?
Laws prohibiting same sex marriage and laws prohibiting polygamy limit people from marrying people that they choose.

Why should the state be okay with two men getting married to each other and not two men getting married to the same woman? Or three women all getting married to each other?
Elon Musk quietly tinkers with education
If you have an android device you might be able to slave a keyboard and an earphone to it and use it that way? I don't know how feasable that is though!!
Anything involving a clearing house.
I hope I’m never in a spot where I have to grovel for my job, via some peer review judgement, instead of leaving for a better job.