skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not understanding what you are saying because it sounds like you are claiming it is OK for people on electric vehicles to slam into pedestrians in pedestrian crossings because a lot of people have died in accidents involving cars. And, keep in mind that a 180 lb male on an electric skateboard doing 25 MPH slamming head on into a little old lady crossing the street is more than an inconvenience. The fact that the operator decided to operate his vehicle in a pedestrian crossing adds insult to injury.

Another example: It is one thing when a motorcyclist decides to weave through cars in congested traffic ... A pedestrian can hear that approaching and, in my experience, motorcyclists do not think they have the right to ram into people. With a silent electric vehicle carrying your average entitled punk, the situation is different.

I have not seen one person operating such an electric vehicle who obeyed any rules. So, if there is a 19th century law that can be used to banish them, I support that.
For a distressingly large cohort of writers of note (think Kingsley Amis) and their adoring fans, alas yes.
It seems that they used bitcoin as a shortcut for cryptocurrencies as a whole, which frankly isn't that far fetched given the current state of the cryptocurrency world.
>"The government" is people.

A relatively small group of people, governing a huge group of people. The granularity gap is crazy. It's very hard for me to get exact numbers, but it seems[1] that the US federal government employs around 2 million people, and the US population is ~328 million. That's 164 people to be governed per employee, and most of those employees are not involved in establishing sets of rules.

It is quite beyond the governments capacity to adjust it's rules to handle an individuals personal circumstances or the changing nature of society, which is why there are so many unjust judicial rulings and so many outdated laws still on the books.

Governments should stick to making only the rules which _cannot_ be handled at any scale below the millions. Power lines need to be a matched voltage nation-wide. Railway gauges must be the same nation-wide. Petrol from any petrol station should work in any car, and burning it should not be poisonous at any density of cars found anywhere in the nation. These are the things a government is for. Tie-breaking multiple valid solution arguments on an epic scale. It doesn't matter that much what voltage we pick, just that we pick _a_ voltage, singular.

Governments are quite incapable of managing smaller-scale decisions. For example, it turns out the cannabis oil is pretty amazing at suppressing fits in people with epilepsy, and MDMA might turn out to be the solution tens of thousands of PTSD sufferers have needed for decades. We've at least suspected both of these things for around half a century. Unfortunately, both substances are regulated by a government so large it is literally not capable of making criminal possession exceptions for universities so that these effects can be studied. Lives have been lost due to this scaling problem.

Governments are a great tool for certain problems. For other problems, they are like trying to scrub food off a porcelain bowl with a jackhammer.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_civil_se...
Did I say C didn’t have problems? Or did a say it’s not a problem that C might allow you to do unsafe things?
Frink is really great as a sophisticated calculator (it is also quite powerful and nice programming language, but I've never used it's full potential). It helped me with cosmology classes assignments (very convenient unit conversions and built-in all physical constants I could wish for) . I just wish it had a better ide. I would love Frink Jupiter kernel with nice latex formula display. I emailed the author about that, but he wasn't interested. Maybe some skilled person from HN would take the challenge? Frink deserves more love, the amount of details included there is amazing and it's one man job. Very impressive.
Well, for those of us who attempts participate in democracy, by writing/calling politicians, supporting NGOs, voting and so forth, YES, it actually matters whether it works.

I'm sure it's not a solution for all problems. As the article says it's a blunt tool. But given that they do work, I'll keep encouraging my politicians to not let our alcohol and tobacco taxes slip below that of neighboring countries.

Given that we're already paying the overhead, we might as well get some effect by cranking up the taxes :) hehe

(well, maybe there's other downsides, but it's thought worth considering)
I certainly can, I did so in simple, easy to understand language with examples right here in this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17746413
The city can just go remove them if they want to, but this illustrates one of my primary complaints with local government here:

The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. She developed this project with help from the government, albeit a different department. Instead of that being enough to continue, she gets threats.

I hope she continues to ignore them, and her expansion goes well elsewhere. They’ll come around once she can prove they drive more business (read: taxes) to the area.
> “Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."

Yet the linked post doesn't employ it.

> "Keep the pressure on."

This is the same as be vigilant, be persistent. Fight for what you believe in. This has nothing to do with skeptics, it's about engaging those who similarly do so. Thus it's an active discussion. The pressure is obvious because of the high stakes nature of the topic.

> "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."

The threat of a fucked up Earth for our children seems a lot more terrifying for us than for them. They are born into it, we see the change.

> "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."

This simply applies to people who are either science communicators by occupation or paid shills for fossil companies.

> "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside"

That's why climate change denialists continue to deny full force, clinging onto the slightest thing. Fighting straw men.

> "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

That's again why denialists muddy up old things, like the Al Gore movie. Which has nothing to do with the science.

> the alarmist side instead uses phrases like “virtually none of the climate-change deniers have a clue about the underlying science.”

And? It seems to be true. It's not a smear phrase, it's the truth laid bare. Denialists are not sophisticated scientists proposing alternate models that explain the data better. Their level of argumentation is very simple, and very much not in good faith.

> It’s impossible to have a rational debate when the leadership of the debate engages in ad hominem attacks as a matter of tactics.

I don't know who you identify as the "leadership", but there are millions of people who think there's man made global warming and they regularly try to convince other people of this without following any sort of leadership.
Right. I feel like anyone that believes the “truly decentralized” aspect of Bitcoin is being intentionally obtuse.
While this is a lovely idea, obviously the dataset is limited to not include things near me -- there are four open bars within 20 minutes walking distance.

While the minimalism is lovely, a link which provided a little more information, particularly on where the data is coming from, would be nice.
> and letting corporations be responsible for guarding their own secrets

The point of patents is that we don’t want corporations guarding trade secrets, we want them to make their secrets public so that others can benefit from them. And in exchange, they get some time where nobody else can use it.

Getting rid of patents will just lead to trade secrets getting lost, like so many have been through history.
One person's "consequences" have minimal impact when spread across society--but when we talk about society-level action, we're never just talking about "one" person, but are instead talking about ratios.

Sure, it doesn't impact us much if one person drinks themselves to liver failure. But if we're talking about 0.1% or 1% or 10% of people drinking themselves to liver failure by 50, we eventually have to start making hard tradeoffs.

It might seem ideal from a maximal-freedom perspective to let anyone who wants to drink themselves to liver failure do so, but it's worth thinking ahead to whether those tradeoffs increase or reduce the maximal-freedom-per-capita.
The state calls them “vending amenities” which sounds perfectly apt to me. The city is defining a new category they call a “dog harbor”.

The business model is unproven. I think the US is the wrong place to start this. People are too nervous about leaving their pets, but it seems unfounded.
Yes, as a Westerner I hadn't even heard of this massive invalidation of 86% of India's cash currency.

Pretty dramatic, certainly could have helped the massive crypto price run-up in late 2017. Also helps to demonstrate the value of a currency that can't be manipulated by state actors.
Who has the upper hand, China?
I don't totally understand your reasoning. There is no downside to using SSL encryption and its completely free for websites to install it.

On the other hand, there are downsides to not using it (which have been previously mentioned).
Nine women can't give birth to a baby in one month. There are inherent compromises involved in the writers' room division of labour. It's extremely difficult for 40 people to share a coherent artistic vision.
Tide-Predicting Machine No. 2
> $2.9k
That's your choice though right? I know people in Seattle, SF, and NY who pay both less and more than that. I know many people who get tech jobs and then jump to an expensive car and apt, but there are other options--personally I choose to live more simply and save boat-loads of money because I like the idea of "FIRE". No one is forcing you to spend so much. Sure making more is fun and handy, but spending less is also an option.

Anyways, good luck on your dreams :)
After getting caught flatfooted by Uber, I think cities have wised up and now come down hard on startups whose game plan is “break the law and ignore cease-and-desist letters, but move so fast that you can’t be pushed out“. Future entrepreneurs with this strategy in mind should not expect to get away with it just because Uber did.
This finds 4 restaurants at $ within 20 miles of Chicago and Austin in Chicago; the circle with that radius covers almost the entire city of Chicago. I'm guessing this is optimized for SFBA; I'd recommend telling people it's not ready in other places yet.
I attend Holberton school which begins with bash/C, build your own printf from system calls, build your own shell, etc. I come from a background in physics/hardware eng and have gotten lots of value out of it.
Doesn't work in a Sacramento suburb. Tried cafes and restaurants.
Deep learning to predict the lab-of-origin of engineered DNA
Yeah if you've ever used proper thermal cameras, "not great" is an understatement. Plus I assume they are limited to 9 FPS which sucks.

Someone really needs to challenge FLIR's monopoly.
> where an individual is only affecting themselves

This depends on political context. In much of the western world outside the US (and partially in the US) healthcare is a publicly funded service. If you pay for your neighbors healthcare, then your neighbors obesity is an externality.

> or cigarettes, on the other hand, there are two potential externalities to tax.

And again here: my neighbors lung cancer is on my taxes, so effectively the only fair cost of cigarettes includes all treatment from all smoking and of course all lost tax revenues from the sick smokers who couldn't work etc. That's a lot more money needed than to cover just second hand smoke as an externality.

And even if you don't factor in public healthcare, an unhealthy population is an externality although not as immediately obvious.
If current social trends continue, working in Tech is going to be considered a sin. Get ready to pay extra taxes for your choice to work in such an abhorrent industry.
The Great Turkish War
Vert.x uses an existing HTTP server as well: Netty.
Scalable mobility support in future internet architectures
Why do you think games development is like this?
I generally don't do long answers but I've done what you are suggesting so stick with me.

I worked in a school and created a saas product as a sideline. This was very manageable in the world of school. I joined an IT company 8 years ago and brought my saas product with me. My product requires very little support so the new company were happy to let me do my full time work and let me look after product. The company even thought they may get involved with my product but it differed too much from their vision. 8 years on I now work 3 days a week for the company and 2 days a week on my on own saas product and I'm very happy. The company have been very supportive.

Some people here are saying don't do it, think of your kids. I started my sideline as I wasn't making enough to save any money and wanted to put some money aside for my kids. My kids and I (who are now adults) are very close. Do what you think is best.

I think it's important to be honest. If you go down this route make something that requires as little interaction with your users as possible. It was always important for me not to be the guy sneaking out to take calls.

I reckon a good starting place would be setting aside an evening or something and sticking to a fixed amount of time. I've been down the road of a full time job and sideline taking up my whole week. I won't go back there again. I don't work on Saturdays. I don't really work on Sundays either but I'm very involved in my church which is another type of commitment.

Have a good think about why you want to do this? Having my own thing which I made and try to grow fires me up. Know what your reasons are so you don't end up disappointed.
I hate such life style and I hate it more when people glorify such thing.

Many people are actually following such behavior and think they should do it too.
This is something that's made me think a lot about the health care debate.

Would it not be just that, if we're going to rewrite the economic rules in some areas, we give partial compensation towards those we just screwed over?

Presumably we're changing the rules because of progress (e.g. Uber and Lyft showing on-demand rideshare has a market), which is good for everyone.

But say the human lifespan is 85 years +/-. 25 years for education to post-secondary graduation (e.g. bachelor's degree in US). Probably another 2-5 years of accumulating working capital for your venture.

So there's a set number of "shots" a person gets in their life.

In this instance, what's wrong with saying "We're doing away with the medallion system. Existing medallions will be repurchased by the government at a price proportional to ownership time. Funding will be accomplished by a tax on rideshare companies, that decreases yearly, and ends 5 years from now"?

Otherwise, I see the following sequence of events: (1) people get screwed by technological upheaval -> (2) people become resentful against technological progress -> (3) people vote in politicians / laws that retard technological progress, to the detriment of all
110%? I hope so :)
That’s a really neat article!
2 Wall Street banks made millions selling the collapsing shares of MoviePass' co
I agree with your praise of the comment, but I really don't think this sort of haughty dismissal is constructive. If you find yourself frustrated that people are taking umbrage with something, explore that - a defense peppered with insults does harm to the image of the object of your praise.
Modern sin taxes tend to be about maximizing tax revenue and not reducing harmful acts. When sin taxes are enacted, they tend to be relatively reasonable. I've heard as high as 20% for marijuana legislation, however I can promise you that 20-30 years after legalization, that tax will have crept slowly, higher and higher.
Cool idea. I've seen more than a few things work based on the questions they ask and how well they present the results. Consider using design thinking for this space.
This is stupid, but not because I agree with Alex Jones - but because actions like this are used against people like Alex Jones, but not against others equally/more deserving...

There can be a long-long list of people/orgs/institutions that can be boycottable, yet we only see lip-service with actions like this against people, who, once blocked, really won't make a difference in the general quality of the world.
What Does Immersing Yourself In  A Book Do To Your Brain?
A talk on Frink by its author (Alan Eliasen) from the Emerging Languages Camp 2010 in Portland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NZ_qvQy5Cc
I think he means gmail.
I'd be perfectly happy with a tax on data collection and targetted ads.
But they should be aware that the bulk of the damage that smokers, drinkers and the obese do is to themselves, and not to others

Unless you have a functional health care system, in which case increased costs are passed on to everyone's taxes. It would be appropriate to dedicate revenues from tobacco and alcohol taxes to medical care.

Sin taxes are taxes that fall only on the users of the products or services in question, and rarely have knock-on effects like fuel taxes (which then raise the cost of transporting everything else, but promote more efficient transportation).

Adding recycling deposits, for example, vastly increases the rate of recycling, reduces litter, provides a minor source of income for the homeless, and provides a very small tax revenue.
Stop Asking Me Math Puzzles to Figure Out If I Can Code (2013)
It's a 20 minute walking distance (i.e. about a mile), not a 20 mile distance.
I use Alpine Linux.

A minimalistic and stable distro with up-to-date packages. I only regret the lack of SystemD, replaced by a system that I don't fully understand yet, but hey, learning.
> Something went wrong!

Stockholm, Sweden. I guess nothing outside SF works? :P
Good work, you deserve every single bit of it. Keep going. You can do it.
Ehh, I understand your point in general, but I think it's significantly more nuanced than that.

Take the car mechanic. His incentives don't completely align with yours. Taking a benign example, his goals are to keep your car in good condition and to make money. Your goals are to keep your car in good condition and to save money. Thus, the car mechanic might err on the side of caution and suggest you replace your car brakes every 30 thousand miles, while you (assuming you knew all the relevant information) would only replace the brakes every 50 thousand miles.

In the absence of "strong evidence and reasoning", you may still reasonably decide that you don't trust the mechanic.
I feel the title is willfully insulting to the city. How about "She had a genius idea: Putting private doghouses in the middle of public property as handy tripping hazzards for the blind, which couldn't even be used without paying. Then the city showed up"
Really? I asked in good faith for you to better articulate your position, not to be condescendingly told to read it again.

Your post consists of a paragraph about externalities, some lovely-sounding "I believe that..." positions, and a couple example axes on which a society might bifurcate. I don't see a logical connection between them, and I think a leap like that warrants articulation.

So, one more time for the folks who don't share your implicit premises: how do sin taxes result in a structurally bifurcated society?

EDIT: phrasing
It is tempting to say "everything", but acquiring knowledge takes time, so you need to prioritize. I would recommend the following areas: (note: the order does not imply priority; I would rather recommend to do this in parallel, like get the most useful 20% of everything first and then go deeper)

* Keeping your body alive and healthy: what to eat, how to exercise properly, how to avoid diseases, how to avoid crime.

* Keeping your mind sane: how to think rationally, how to avoid mental traps (cults, scams, political mindkilling, superstition... i.e. various forms of manipulation and self-manipulation), what makes you happy and productive, how conditioning works.

* Gathering power: social skills, financial skills.

* Meta skills: how to acquire skills faster, prioritizing and managing your time...

And perhaps computer programming as a starting skill -- something that will nicely pay your bills until you become sufficiently great at the remaining skills.
Either John wrote the song or Paul did. Therefore P(Paul wrote it) either one or zero. It cannot be anything else. We do not know which one and we are not going to find out by counting or doing arithmetic.

After listening to the song one more time, and reading the article again, I've updated my beliefs that this senior lecturer in Stats fancies himself some kind of cool guy, and is trying to make name for himself by immersing himself in the study of women's beach volleyball[1] and Beatles.

Also, it sounds to me like this something Paul would have written.

Now, can you please explain what it means to calculate that P(Paul wrote it) = 0.018? Note that I am not asking about how the calculations work.

[1]: http://www.glicko.net/
Something went wrong?
To this point, since I made this app as a personal tool, I only targeted Android.

If there's any way in which I could make the app available on some other systems, it'd be nice to do so.

Which systems do you have in mind ?
It uses Yelp's API under the hood. Is Yelp active in Stockholm? I'll go through the error messages and see what's up.
In that case 'I' am not me, so the probability would still be zero as 'I' do not exist. But even more so there are a finite number of possible chess games and it’s less than a googleplex so even if I where in a time loop their are not that many games playable.

You are welcome to try and come up with a possibility, but really it's 0 with error bars on something not conceivable.

Edit, by which I mean if my understanding if the game is flawed then the estimate is less accurate, but that does not directly improve the odds. Thus that’s an error bar as again it does not directly change the actual probability.
> Could someone familiar with the matter talk more about what the days/weeks following Modi's announcement looked like for the every day Indian?

People with money sold extra rupees to people below the maximum conversion at a small discount. Bank deposits bumped up, which was the point of the exercise—Indian state-owned banks are woefully uncompetitive and undercapitalised. The line about dirty rupees being extinguished was a farce, mostly because most large-scale illicit activity in India happens with hard currency and/or in Mauritius or Singapore.
I understand what you're saying; that's the intuitive interpretation that most people have. But the research doesn't back that up.

There are a number of studies on the matter: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=money+and+happiness+study . Money makes you happier, but only to a point and with quickly diminishing returns. Once you're basic needs are met, you need to work on other areas of your life, like social relationships, to find happiness, not just making more money.

Also look up "Hedonic Treadmill"; human psychology is such that we get used to what makes us happy faster than we expect. You think 150k will make you happy? Once you make that it does make you happy! But then a few months later, it's like "eh whatever".
Same in Miami, FL