skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a surprise on Thursday (if not before).

If the prisoner is alive on Thursday at noon he will either be surprised to find he is to be hanged on Thursday, or surprised to find it will be Friday. Before that he had 50% expectation for either, and there is bound to be a negative surprise with regard to one day and a positive surprise for the other.
I would add to this thread, but I don't want to get lambasted.
FYI it's actually 'Canada Day', equivalent to 'Bastille Day' in France, or July 4th in the US.

The 'moving day' bit is a slightly subtle dig at the very notion of the country. It's complicated, though as of late less hostile.

Source: me, Anglophone living in entirely French district of Montreal.
Title fixed now.
Discussed in 2015: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9632751.
I'm not sure how you'd manage to "smoke the equivalent of 2 packs of cigs in something like 4/5 hours". Firstly you're not inhaling any combustion products, so that's not equivalent to start with. Secondly the absorbance of nicotine from ecig vapour is much lower than when nicotine is inhaled in the form of smoke such equivalence is not really measurable.
> Which is meaningless in the present. Just ask Greece how valuable to your present circumstances basking in the very, very distant past is.

Slightly off-topic, but for some reason I've run into a seemingly disproportionate (in terms of world population) number of good computer scientists who were born in Greece.
Rust for High-Level Programming Language Developers
That is the mechanism by which junk drawers and attics are filled.
Madness and also inefficient.
A Note from Cecil Adams about the Straight Dope
It depends. If there is a smart contract involved then the smart contract could deduct tokens from the users account automatically. This wouldn't be possible with ETH, but would be possible with a token issued on the Ethereum network.
Meh. I feel like this article misses the point.

Swing is 3 against 2, metrically speaking, but it is also folklore, tradition, and a tremendous amount of micro-information in where each note is placed relative to the beat. The "cutting edge of jazz swing theory" video in the article ticks off most of the boxes:

* There's micro-information in whether a note is ahead of, on top of, or behind the beat.
* The swing ratio can vary, and it tends to straighten out at higher tempos.
* Drummers tend to play at a higher swing ratio than soloists.

All that said, it's been said that jazz is the marriage of African rhythm and European harmony, and that's not too far off. But the article neglects the Africa/tradition part of it entirely. Search for "Africa" in that article and you find one match. Search for "Black" and you find three matches, all in regard to the color, not the race. But that's where it comes from, and that's the context in which you need to understand it. Why are those patterns found across so many drummers listed in the "cutting edge" video (Art Taylor / Connie Kay / Billy Higgins / Elvin Jones / Tony Williiams / Carl Allen / Jeff 'Tain' Watts / Jack DeJohnette / Max Roach / Dennis Chambers)? It's because they're coming out of a common tradition, speaking the same musical language.

The writer of the article seems to like swing music around the late '30s, and claims that the rules fit well with that music because those people were playing swing without the influence of bop, soul-jazz, rock and roll, and other modern music. I would argue that the rules fit that period of music better for a different reason. This is when it was pop music, and when simplified / whitened versions of it (Dorsey brothers / Glenn Miller / etc.) were most common.
Mathematical Proofs 101: How Proofs Should Be Read, Written, and Taught
I'm no fan of php, but you realize the home routers you recommended earlier typically have CGI UIs written in _C_ by people that don't really understand strings and pointers?
I remember reading this as a teenager and concluding that the prisoner actually doesn't know for sure whether he will be hung on Tuesday or not, because he may be hung on Wednesday. Only on Thursday can he be reasonably sure he won't be hung on Friday, and thus he would know he is hung on Thursday. But any day before that, he wouldn't really know.

But also I think Martin Gardner concluded the same thing.
Not sure why parent is getting downvoted; this is a thing that's actually happening. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ag-sessions-says-trump-...
Obama appointee to senior ICE post pleads guilty to ID theft, fraud
the real loss here is that we have government which spends billions to incarcerate people and little to support them when out. worse it puts up barriers to any chance of success with an over abundance of occupational license requirements that specifically exclude those who have been jailed. top it off with scarlet letter treatment for some offenses and many of these people have no opportunity to turn their lives around. Hell you cannot be a dog catcher is the majority of this country if you have a conviction.

Charitable organizations, family, and private businesses are the few chances they have. We should support all of them and work to get the government out of the way where possible. A felon/former addict/etc stands a much better chance of moving to better jobs if they can land any job and hold it a few months.
It only works if everyone does it, or if you're really well prepared and have irrefutable evidence of something. If you're the only one (or even part of a small group) calling them out you just get buried. You're basically a naive amateur working against someone who has spent their life focused on getting and exploiting power. It's literally what they live for.

Imagine a random guy wandering into an MMA cage and punching Connor Mcgregor in the face. Calling out sociopaths is the social version of doing that.

They're prepared, they'll have pawns that do all their dirty work, they'll have built up a network of obligations around themselves, they'll have taken control of whatever channels of information dissemination exist within the group and be actively shaping the narrative within the organisation. Standing up and pointing them out will get the whole apparatus focused on steamrolling you. It's nasty business.

Maybe it is better to try before walking away but there's a pretty big personal cost. I've done it and wasted huge amounts of time and energy and i have no idea whether it really made any difference in the end. I think there is an endless sea of problems and you only have a finite life and aren't responsible for everyone else's decisions. If everyone else is going to tolerate BS then who am I to try to change it? There are so many people, so many organisations that you could find a hill to die on every day of the week and probably make no difference to anything. I've come to the conclusion that I'm better off just dodging that stuff when it comes up and focusing on building up healthy, loving relationships among my community rather than trying to tilt against windmills in these hierarchical social organisations.

I think my motto is basically 'eh, fuck it, I'm off' when it comes to this stuff now. I think that's how you really beat it, don't play the game.
Of course there is a spectrum
and more than one way to skin a cat, but when voicing a political opinion results in institutionalized punishment you can’t claim that the country is free regardless of any other circumstances.

As someone else said here just the fact that you can get into a Twitter flame war with Trump proves the US is a free country not otherwise.
For assignments: I would recommend using Continuous integration in the classroom. You could have Grad students help you setup the system. Here is my related blog post: https://blog.github.com/2017-03-01-real-time-feedback-for-st...
For the Lecture: This could be subjective, but I would look at online MOOCS to see what presentation style lecturers use these days.
"...divides a single image into many different images, then compresses them separately." Wouldn't it be better to go the other way and backpack-algo the pages into a consolidated texture atlas based on edge similarity, and then run compression on the result?
There's no game theory here. People need to stop calling everything game theory in order to sound smart. It's a government granted monopoly. Because it involves a mysterious Chinese man and fireworks, it sounds more interesting for the media.
"the Tandy graphics memory was separate in the same way that the EGA graphics memory was separate---it was never used for program code."

This is incorrect. The Tandy graphics adapter did share ram with the cpu. The service manual for the Tandy 1000 can be found at http://www.thealmightyguru.com/Wiki/images/7/7c/Tandy_1000_-.... Starting on page 40 is a good description of how this worked.
I skimmed through because it sounds fairly click-baity... From what I gather, they're claiming to have solved NP-complete problems to some degree with some abstract form algorithm? I'm genuinely interested, if anyone can explain what's going on...
FreeBSD Desktop – Part 12 – Configuration – Openbox
StephenGross
tl;dr: This is a magic trick, not a formal system.

Reminds me of the definition of a magic trick from "The Prestige":

“Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called "The Pledge". The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course... it probably isn't. The second act is called "The Turn". The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because of course you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn't clap yet. Because making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back. That's why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call "The Prestige".”

Kind of abstract but it's like...

- The Pledge: Hello convict, here is your sentence.

- The Turn: Actually just kidding, look at this giant loophole in my sentencing. Wow! Expectations subverted!

- The Prestige: Haha, no, I'm just messing with you. There's no loophole but you lacked the context to discern that in The Turn phase.

edit: This is pretty interesting. As the wiki says, how one defines a "surprise" is the whole bugger of the thing. If you use the magic trick metaphor, "surprise" is reframed as "context."

The reason it's so murky trying to pick apart what actually happened is hard is because that's the point of the system. It's designed to be un-figure-out-able. I would love to know how you'd formalize a system whose output is "lack of context"

edit2: Also if you zoom out a level, giving someone a link to the Unexpected Hanging paradox page is a repetition of the same Pledge->Turn->Prestige pattern

- The Pledge: Here's a wikipedia page. You've looked at information on wikipedia pages. You share my confidence this info on this page will adhere to logical rules.

- The Turn: Oh but buh-bam, now you are busy trying to unscramble a paradox.

- The Prestige: You can't figure out paradoxes, that's their point. I will, however, confess this is a terrible magic trick.
Video: Quantum Computing Expert Explains One Concept in 5 Levels of Difficulty
> And yet Australians are already richer than the French at the median, along with having a far higher GDP per capita.

I agree with your main point, caveat that I don't know anything about the current state of French science because I don't know any French.

With this aside though, Australia has an order of magnitude more land than France, and half as many people, so individual Australians should have an absurd amount of raw resource available to them. In a sense, Australia should have a GDP per capita 20x France's purely on raw resources.

Comparing material wealth and academic success isn't really fair. Academics depends on small communities, and is a highly cultural endeavor. Wealth depends on resources and stability, which is less so.
I still can’t believe you can’t look at Snapchat in a browser/desktop, makes it useless for me. Instagram is far more accessible.
The typical pattern for a while was something like "I'm in (or was) in China and things are fine, I had no problem using the internet...". Then some other stuff and some weird comment like "It was nice that I could walk around China freely and not have to worry about thieves unlike in the US."
I listened to the first episode yesterday and I was instantly hooked. I love the premise, the mystery, the characters theories and assumptions and so on. Just finished the third episode and I can't wait for more. Congrats, very good work.
China is filled with scammers, you are much less likely to get mugged as a westerner in major cities but you are in open season for the millions (literally) of thieves that use other means knowing that law enforcement is ineffective especially when it comes to foreigners as long as you don’t beat them up.
Worse, they can potentially more than cancel it out, if they merely remove the "worrying about hardware" (yes, and network and load balancers and everything else) aspects, which are, at least, well understood by some us out on the market, and replace it with "worrying about the provider" where a failure scenario is, not only more opaque, but potentially catastrophic, since it's a single vendor with all the infrastructure.

It reminds me of AWS's opacity-as-antidote-to-worry with respect to hardware failures. If the underlying hardware fails, the EC2 instance on it just disappears (I've heard GCP handles this better, and AWS might now, as well). I like to point out that this doesn't differ much from the situation of running physical hardware (while ignoring the hardware monitoring), both from a "worry" burden perspective and from a "downtime from hardware failure" perspective.
The only people that should be using the word sociopath to describe the behavior of others are people in the field of mental health care. Why diagnose people? Call them out on behavior that pisses you off, deal with it in an assertive manner. Calling a sociopath a sociopath in a non clinical context would only give them more power.

A real sociopath doesn't care if you call them that. It just give the purported sociopath more information about the social environments expectations of their behavior. If they are in the social group, they are accepted, and if they are labeled a sociopath, as long as they continue to be accepted they will see their behavior as acceptable. If it's not confronted head on, one doesn't give 'the purported sociopath' the opportunity to prove either or.
> requiring the companies to pay a deposit to cover potential scooter-involved damage to city property

so I guess if they damage non-city property, tough shit?
“All revolutions are conceived by idealists, implemented by fanatics, and its fruits are stolen by scoundrels.” -Thomas Carlyle

Perhaps this should be adapted: Subcultures are conceived by geek idealists, run by geek fanatics, overrun by mops, and then stolen by sociopaths.

I think there is an impedance mismatch between the market nature of the Internet as a whole, versus the centrally controlled nature of subsections of it. Let's say that your allegiance isn't to one particular scene, but you're in a scene, and it becomes overrun by sociopaths. Well, in that case, you can just choose a different scene. The "free market of ideas" has worked. That's good for mops, which is to say it's good for most consumers and most people.

But what if you can't/won't leave a particular scene? That particular scene is probably of the size where a small number of online groups (perhaps 1) dominates 90% of the communications, power, and resources in that scene. In that case, there is no "free market of ideas." From that point of view, there is only a centralized totalitarianism to face. (You can see this embodied in miniature in Reddit. Want to discus media/stories? Reddit provides a whole lot of choices, then! Want to discuss superhero comics? You'd better hew to particular politics, and the mere asking questions about certain topics will get you perma-banned.)

The organizing/media power of tools available to Geeks and Sociopaths both has increased to the point where sociopaths can control viable city/states/islands of culture. The available tools unwittingly fit and facilitate the centrally controlled authoritarian tendencies of sociopaths.

Is there a technological/game-theoretic solution?

In recent years, YouTube, Discord, and other online tools/sites have become a technological/game-theoretic solution. If a particular scene has been overrun by sociopaths, who then become drunk on power and start going too far, people have started to speak out against the authoritarianism on YouTube. Unfortunately, in recent years, this has led to the urging for and attempts at censorship on those platforms.
> How about you tell me what you think.

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

> I'm a professional physicist

You're behaving more like a troll than a physicist. What is your field of expertise?
Even for small businesses their sales is pretty bad. I once got a package in the mail from them with a URL containing a tracking code printed on it to contact them that was so obviously Google being Google and treating people as part of a funnel. There was no phone number to be found and nothing personalized.

The other funny thing is the package had a neoprene sleeve for a Chromebook. Eventually a sales person reached out via email assuming I owned a Chromebook and acted like I owed them a phone call because they gave me a neoprene sleeve I couldn’t use.

The entire package ended up going in the trash, which was an unfortunate waste of unrecyclable materials.
I believe the logic is:

1) Porn (crypto, gambling, etc.) transactions are significantly riskier than other transactions.

2) CC processing involves a long chain of intermediaries.

3) At every step of the chain there's strong pressure upstream for better rates, and strong pressure downstream to ensure the blended payment stream is safer.

So, eventually, someone in the chain gets told "sure, we can give you better rates, but only if you can improve the risk profile of your payment stream". And then they crunch the numbers, and decide it's worth it, knowing they'll lose some volume but hoping they can make it up with better margins. And then the people who churn find one of the remaining partners who hasn't adopted strict policies, and this repeats until all the "dodgy" payments are going through a high-fee chain that can't possibly afford to change their policies, and everyone else is going through a low-fee chain.

If you check CCBill, their "Blue" package that allows adult content runs 10.8% to 14.5%, with a $1,000 yearly "high risk registration fee". And even their normal plan (which doesn't allow adult content) seems to be 5.9% + $0.55 per transaction? Braintree is 2.9% + $0.30; Stripe is the same.

You can see why, eg, Stripe would be happy to leave CCBill to have a virtual monopily on adult transactions: There's not that many of them, they're so risky you'll need to charge absurdly high rates just to cover your costs, and just touching them at all will potentially taint your other transactions in the eyes of your upstream partners, driving up your rates. Conversely, you can see why CCBill will never kick the adult payments off their platform; it's the only thing they have to offer.

Disruptive startups work best when they can start with a niche and then grow from there, but the logic of the financial system makes that very difficult.
Right. Because big companies never ever do anything unjustified. Particularly when they put automatic processes in place with no humans in the loop, because we all know that computers never make mistakes.
California doctor punished for exempting 2-year-old boy from immunizations
As a security concerned British person, this throws multiple red flags to me.

1. A Country that failed to upgrade it's NHS systems from Windows XP after 10+ billion pounds of investment and subsequently got hacked, leading to many deaths - scares me. The data they are collecting is very intimate. If it was leaked, somebody could track persons of interest (government officials, politicians, journalists, undercover police, etc), tell whether somebody is having an affair, make correlations between friends groups - tonnes of data. They could potentially figure out where you work, where you go for lunch, who you meet, who you phone - it's just too much.

2. Today it's about catching "known" criminals, tomorrow it's about predicting future criminals and sending them to state "rehabilitation" camps (just look at China), selling you data to the highest bidder (it's happened on the Council level in the past) or some other ridiculous use. Blocking websites on the internet used to be about removing exploitation of young persons, now it's used to block pirating of copyright material.

3. A right to be forgotten - if you've done nothing wrong, you shouldn't be tracked. I can understand the need to hold this sort of data for a short period of time, but after this it should be deleted. I think privacy is a fundamental freedom, along with freedom of speech, freedom to travel, etc.

4. The accuracy of facial detection, even if it's 99.99% for 70 million people, is still 7000 mistakes (at a massive simplification). It's actually worse than that, both the real accuracy of face detection and the error rate for specific people. It's also "easy" to trick. When it works it works well, but what about the person who is incorrectly detained, potentially injured for a crime they never committed? And that's not even taking into consideration that a lot of these face detection algorithms tend to be subtly racist (over trained on locals, badly trained on foreign persons).

5. Lack of oversight for such a powerful technology - to collect data on this magnitude is absolutely insane and needs multiple groups of people to keep it's use in check. Not just government based but also separate non-government groups which receive funding elsewhere.

That all said, I can understand the clear benefit - remove the human element from tracking these people. But with any powerful technology we must always ask - at what cost? I think this inflicts too much on a persons basic freedoms.
Well there are free movies, free music too if you search hard enough. I'm happy not everybody thinks like you because this thinking destroys quality and industries.
sheer speed isn't what sets records here, unless they engineer the car to have ridiculous levels of down force it won't break the top 10. the cars that run sub seven minute have the combination of acceleration, deceleration, and cornering ability, to pull it off. Not saying they cannot but considering the efforts the big names have been at this a long time and take a lot of their racing expertise to create cars which can do it.
It's something you should almost never need to do and about half the manual implementations I see of Send are wrong. Trust Rust on this one.
The Opium of the Intellectuals (2005)
iTunes for porn

You're the only other person I've seen use this phrase.

If you're serious about working on this, contact me.
Mechanism aside, it does seem that Patreon etc need new payment processors. I had thought of using Patreon, but there's no way to get paid anonymously. And even if I could manage something ~anonymous with PayPal, I've read too many horror stories to ever trust them.

I use VPS from several providers that accept Bitcoin etc. And I can maintain a cash balance to recover recurring charges. That's OK, for providers that I use routinely.

So as you say, it'd be cool to have third-party payment processors, which are privacy-friendly and content-agnostic. But it's a nontrivial problem. I suppose that it could pay via direct transfer, with site/service/creator-specific accounts to protect against theft, and funding from Bitcoin etc. However, I suspect that only banks can do direct transfers, and starting banks is itself nontrivial.