skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is mostly wrong.

For a period accuracy on ICBMs wasn't very great (on the order of a kilometer), which is why they made use of very high yield weapons in the several megaton range. Large warheads were necessary to take out targets (such as population centers) with those accuracy levels. Then several things changed: accuracy improved greatly, the ability to put multiple warheads on a single missile arrived (MIRVing), and anti-ballistic missile defense (ABM) started taking off. This lead to the use of more, higher accuracy, lower yield warheads to take out targets. You could blanket a city with sub-megaton MIRVed warheads instead of using one big 10 megaton bomb. And then the calculus of "but how many will be lost to the ABM systems?" came into play, which resulted in use of "penetration aids" like decoys as well as the deployment of vast numbers of warheads to ensure enough of them made it through. That led to a massive rapid escalation in warhead deployment during the '60s and '70s until the ABM treaty flattened it out.

But this is only half the story. The other half is the massive deployment of tactical (battlefield) nukes. With the invention of smaller nuclear warheads combined with the massive production capability of the weapons procurement pipelines in the US and USSR it became possible to deploy tens of thousands of tactical warheads. These would be used for everything from anti-ship missiles and torpedoes to anti-aircraft weapons to short range ground strike missiles.

The late Cold War and post Cold War arms limitations significantly reduced the deployed number of warheads of both the US and USSR. They massively curtailed the number of tactical nukes deployed, and they resulted in a lot of "de-MIRVing" of missiles. A modern Ohio-class nuclear missile submarine can carry 24 missiles each of which can carry up to 12 W-88 (475 Kt) warheads. Potentially that's up to 288 warheads and over 130 megatons of total destructive power, basically WWIII in a can. However, today they carry far fewer warheads than that due to treaty limitations. Similarly, most of our land based ICBMs have been de-MIRVed and we've retired new weapons systems (like the MX/Peacekeeper) which were heavily MIRVed.

All of this has translated into far fewer warheads in service or on alert and a much reduced overall destructive capability. It is still an overwhelmingly enormous nuclear destructive capability but it has been reduced significantly through treaty obligations over the years.
Open source software and protocols, as opposed to proprietary players and formats. The latter is pretty much soft DRM.
Tyler Cowen talks with Paul Krugman [audio and transcript]
I’m pretty much just trying to say, “Let’s talk about the science.”

Generally speaking, if you would like there to be discussion of the science, it works vastly better to lead by example and think of something meaty and meaningful to say about that instead.
Reddit has https://www.reddit.com/r/genderpolitics , HN doesn't. Ergo Reddit seems to be a better place for gender politics chat.
Nobody gets into an immigration detention facility by asking.
It's not that simple: many don't have the technical preparation or still don't know about this in spite of everything.

Rather than "teaching a lesson the hard way", but also rather than just delaying the distrust passively, I would introduce a visual warning in the lock icon, rather than in the developer console.
In the eyes of SEC, ICOs are nothing more than equity crowdfunding. It means that SEC doesn't like any sale of unlisted assets to unaccredited investors.

By SEC definition accredited investor is an investor who has either $1M of liquid net worth or stable income not less than $200k per year.

Original intent of the government was to bar unsophisticated investors from high risk investments.

While I understand logic of the law - many people are completely financially irresponsible and are not capable of critical thinking (that's what politically correct term "unsophisticated investor" actually means), I find this law extremely frustrating.

For example, I had no chance to buy Spotify when it was well under $1B valuation because the government baby-sitting me by excluding me from opportunity to invest into early-stage startups.

If you want to downvote me on "not capable of critical thinking" and at the same time support barring people from making their own financial decisions, please think twice because it's clear contradiction.

There is a compromise: Why not lower entry level of becoming accredited investor? For example, you could be semi-accredited investor with lower capital but with limits on investments. Or making some government exams on risk taking and investing? Or having special government-approved platform for early-stage investments for unaccredited investors. There are lots of combinations.

Right now, there is a huge hunger among people for early-stage investments. And if you are not making it legal, it just go underground and as a result with more dangers for unsophisticated investors.
The Launch of the Liquid Network
Why Microsoft may be relinquishing billions in Android patent royalties
For sure - my comment was just referring to the often mistaken belief that a GC holder doesn't need to pay tax on income earned outside of the US.
I'm skeptical it would have been a realistic deterrent in this case.

If Russia decides it's time to annex the entire country, on the other hand...
Who would have thought a simple FTP-on-some-server would have been so complicated. Thanks for the post!

I'm eagerly waiting for the blog post about how bazel and torrents are used.
To be fair, North Korea bought a lot of their nuclear technology from Pakistan, which stole some of it from a European civilian nuclear program. But you're right that it's relatively easy if a country has the will, money, and other resources to put into a nuclear program. South Africa did it even while facing heavy sanctions.
I should light a candle for St. Stanislav PEtrov.
my god, that is terrible! I generally think there is good content in the TED talks, but I now won't even look at the TEDx talks because regionally they do have to turn to the cranks.
Statistics have to come before anecdotes

Point conceded, even if the two examples I gave are two of the highest profile events in the last five years speaking on the topic of minority repression in America, they are symptoms of a larger disease. But point conceded.

I'll play along and gladly provide sources and statistics if you'd like, I seem to have made a faulty assumption that these issues I pointed to were speaking for themselves rather loudly and the volumes of data would be readily available to anyone inclined to look for them.

There's much more recency to this discussion than what happened in as you put it "the 1930s"
Purely on usability, my pet peeves are these:

1. The sizes of the voting buttons and the expand/collapse links are terrible. They’re so tiny (and the voting buttons placed so close to each other) that even a mouse cursor is not a proper tool to target them. On touchscreens, it’s way worse. The “tap targets” are very tiny for fingers and very difficult to use. Having to zoom in just to use one of those buttons is painful.

2. While looking at some child comment way down on a discussion, there’s no easy and quick way to figure out which comment it’s a reply to. It’s cumbersome and next to impossible. So I don’t even bother reading nested comments after the first or second reply to a comment. There ought to be a way to collapse all other comments above it and just leave the main one that it’s a reply to.

3. Very limited formatting options, with the default way of treating newlines tripping up many people. This results in a long piece of text that’s not easily readable. Just a day or two ago, I saw a YC recruitment ad post that someone had just copy pasted from elsewhere but forgot to use additional newlines to suit the HN formatting requirements. [1] It was a big wall of unreadable text in many places. This is not the first time that something like this has happened.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18169707
I think there is plenty of money being spent on AR R&D right now. We are pretty sure Apple is. Michael Abrash discussed it during his Oculus Connect keynote a few weeks ago. Snapchat has certainly been public about what they want to do. This is the post-phone platform and it is really, really big. A few billion up in smoke isn't going to stop it.

The crime here is Magic Leap hyped the hell out of their product, took tons of money, was extremely opaque about it, and then severely under-deliverd. Exact opposite of Valve and Oculus.
Nah, it’s just highlighting a different problem. Off topic, sure. Problematic, definitely not.
Indeed—but the labour we're talking about here, the kind regulated by copyright, is the distribution of the files; and it's the labels and artists who are employing the force of the State to enjoy the fruits of that labour performed by others for free, having given up on charging a fair rate once and up front for the actual labour of producing the content in favor of a more lucrative, albeit less moral, business model.

If you create something that can be copied endlessly at near-zero cost, and you don't want others enjoying it "for free", then you need to charge an appropriate price for the initial publication. You have every right to keep it to yourself, and to charge whatever price you deem fair in exchange for the service of revealing it to others, but once you've done that it's rightfully out of your hands.
Shouldn't that be "Attorneys General"?
Not sure whether anyone is writing iOS apps in go, but iOS refuses to allocate more than a relatively small amount of address space to each process (a few gigs, even on 64-bit devices).
25 Years of Vibe Magazine
Thanks for the link. Perhaps my core mistake here is speaking from a context of rail freight, when this is really about mass transit.
I've release most of my music on bandcamp and it really is great. It's low barrier of entry, the tools they have are pretty good, and they've given me more visibility than I've gotten on any other platform.

Most of my listening comes from streaming and buying records but bandcamp has a special place in my heart. Especially since they still haven't gotten greedy and started inserting ads everywhere. (maybe they're mining our data? I dunno).
I believe that should read "has the same frequency but is out of phase by HALF A wave length".

> active noise cancelling has the same effect as putting earplugs in due to wave mechanics.

Simply from experience, I would disagree with this. Every time I have ever enabled active noise cancelling, I have experienced an increase in eardrum-pressure, volume, or both (both with and without music playing).

I understand that wave mechanics would theoretically work as you state, but in practice, does not.
> a token that is a security and comply with securities laws

Because if you do that, there's no point having an ICO. Just do an IPO - the token is an expensive, pointless distraction from their mission to democratize the world's dogsitters, or whatever they want to do.
However, I don't think "La La La not listening!" gets us safely and effectively to the other side.

"La La La not listening!" -- is generally a symptom of a faction which is about to become the villains in the story.
It's definitely speculation, but I notice the article did fail to clearly demonstrate that it's anything different...
> In other words it was very unfair.

How? Linux is intentionally released under an open source license. As far as I know, MS follows that license to the letter. How is that unfair? Things don't have to be perfectly symmetric to be fair.

I do think using the FAT patent was wrong on its own, because it was about interoperability when using the one filesystem that can be used everywhere. But I don't think fairness has anything to do with that.

> And possibly asking for legal action.

What kind of legal action?
Yep. Found it too (independently, haven’t updated the comments). Another link (same paper) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274087768_Measureme...

> The results of this study also show that the GC group has a performance that is 42% better than the GC-EF group. These data seem indicate that after an intense physical exercise, people without ADHD show impairment in attention performance. However, this hypothesis requires further studies, which include the assessment of the duration of this effect.
The law is clear. The president has complete control over nuclear weapons, and can order their deployment at anytime. That is by design. This is the lynchpin of mutual assured destruction, and what enables launch on warning to occur. A president at any time can spin the globe, close his eyes and pick a city at random and say “nuke it”, legally it is a valid order.

I too have paid closer attention to the current president’s remarks, and I see so evidence of self-awareness and self-control. I see bullying pretending to be strength. I see habitual self-aggrandizing lies. I see the worst kind of bullshitter: one that believes his own bullshit.
Just to provide a counter-perspective, I am actually happy every time I see someone drawing attention to this problem. If enough people draw attention to it, rather than trying to ignore it and hope it goes away, maybe society will start trying to solve the problem.
there has to be offerings already out there that address that kind of thing, but maybe not. Either way, I agree, tech has the clear edge on this, so long as the rulesets (or whatever parameters are defined) are correct.
If freedom to share code doesn't include freedom to not share code, it's not very free, is it?

The meta-point is that everybody's wringing their hands over "oh no, I can't say things I want to say and also contribute to Linux", and her point is that this is not new, lots of people have experienced this for a long time.
I concur. Have encountered the same (but with different adverts).

There is no opt out / unsubscribe in the unwanted email.

I still respect some of the potential of Alphabet.

Google. No.
Show HN: An API that lets you power an e-commerce site with Uber-like deliveries
Garbage in, garbage out.

The system failed because they were trying to solve the wrong problem, or maybe more specifically, didn't solve the problem that led to the problems with the AI. Amazon was treating the hiring problem as an efficiency problem alone, and ignoring the bias problem. So they wound up training the AI to do a shitty job much faster than humans ever could be shitty - and, by analyzing the data in a way the human results weren't analyzed, showed the failings of the human hiring process.

Existing process is sexist. Automate to "improve" it, and you wind up with something even more sexist. What this means is that Amazon needs to go back and revamp their whole hiring process to make it fair, before trying to make it faster.
> On all sides. Goldman Sachs has their man in Washington, as does Planned Parenthood.

I might be misinterpreting you here but it sounds as if you're saying that all is well and good since all lobby organisations are represented in Washington. The problem to me with this idea would be that not all of the people are represented by all of the lobby organisations. Which makes the system not even a mob rule, but simply a plutocracy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig
People with "architect" in the title generally are a problem especially if they don't code anymore. I think architecture should done by the senior engineers who work on the codebase. If necessary they still can coordinate with other teams.
In ideal world, your technical argument would be enough for higher-ups to take your concerns seriously. In real world, it's mostly how much they like and trust you. If they don't, then validity of your argument will be of no value.
But only for their work on "the Linux System", no?
No. Military is designed to kill some people for the sake of some others' lives. Enemy detection is vital to a military's function. Otherwise it will obliterate itself.
Absurdly high costs of drug research (and then absurdly high costs of getting successful ones approved). We're talking about billions of dollars of investment for something that, once developed, can be copied for pennies by cheap chemical plants. I accept that there needs to be a way for "big pharma" to recoup the development costs, or else they won't even bother with drug research. It seems to me that cost/benefit of patents make them justified in this case. But not in most other industries, not with the patent lengths of today (and lack of any details that would let people reproduce the invention after patent expiration).
How many stowaways still travel via freight trains in the US?

I also don't see any real comparison of freight and public transit via rail other than they are both trains...
See also: anything by Malcolm Gladwell
Dollar-for-dollar clawbacks by the Fed pension guarantee fund of the vultures' bounty + tripling the fraudulent conveyance lookback period, for starters.
A "just so" story like this is certainly unfounded, I think, but I wouldn't call it unfalsifiable. You could search for supporting evidence by investigating, for instance,

- Do we see this effect in species other than humans?

- Is this effect more pronounced in individuals descending from ancestors who were more prone to hunting?
What a fitting article on #worldmentalhealthday.
Would you be so kind as to quote any part of his paper that says this?
Those numbers are a joke. They're the most secretive country in the world and they don't really share economic data. It really can't be overstated just how much wild guesswork is involved in coming up with those figures.

An economist weighs in here: https://www.38north.org/2012/07/rfrank071612/

Moreover, most institutions will systematically under rather than overestimate their economic activity from what scraps of data they do have. You wouldn't, after all, win political capital in the UN or the CIA by declaring the north korean economic model to be more successful than it really is... nobody wants to hear that.
Just being female is a qualification at your workplace?
Great timing! I also believe it takes personal actions, not waiting on someone else.

My personal pledge is to balance the negative impact of my driving and flying. If you are interested, check out the app I'm building for it: https://www.producthunt.com/upcoming/pledge-balance
That defeats the purpose of MAD and makes the use of nuclear weapons more likely. If the response to a nuclear attack is devastating then there is less chance that one will attack in the first place.

I firmly believe nukes are the reason we haven't had world war 3 yet. If no nukes existed the USA and the USSR would have gone at it in the 60s/70s.
Christopher Date and Hugh Darwen, in their work on type systems and the relational model, like to use the Principle of Incoherence: "A principle, sometimes invoked in defense of a less than fully successful attempt at criticizing some technical issue, to the effect that it's hard to criticize something coherently if what's being criticized is itself not very coherent in the first place. Occasionally referred to, a little unkindly, as The Incoherent Principle."
Some of it isn't that bad. Here's Lockport, Illinois Metra station.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lockport+Metra+Station/@41...

Most of the suburban Chicago stations are similar.

(Edit: I'd agree that most of Chicago's rail system is not "post 1960s" though). Chicago is a rail hub and most of the suburbs developed along the rail lines.
Hang on, are you seriously saying people need to create a MS online account just in order to tell their own computer to NOT send data to MS?

That's ridiculous. There should be an obvious friggin question during install "Enable telemetry and data collection?" and if the answer is no... that's it. No telemetry or data collection gets done. Ever. End of story and question doesn't get asked again. Ever.

Any other approach is literally just weasel words trying to deceive people. "Just manually change this RegKey setting" is a good example.
Custom Windows 2000 Patch Project for (mostly) Modern Use
> The crime was already there ...

Crime as at generational (multi-generational?) lows. People are solving a problem that no longer exists.

An American friend of mine is terrified of going into cities; it's bizarre. I've spent a lot of time in American cities, in all sorts of neighborhoods; I've never had a problem. (Like other American conservatives I've talked to, he also seems to define himself as being in opposition to liberals, in this case by putting down cities and their residents; so perhaps it's partly a political thing. However, it's a bit bizarre that political rhetoric would be confused with reality.)
> Seems like most developed countries, with all their different cultures, are following the obesity trend.

Well, sure. But I don't think it's useful to compare obesity in one country that has a surplus of easily available food with other countries that don't.

Hypothermia is rare in Samoa, but I don't think Sweden can learn much from them about that fact.
I'm for making language mean what we want it to mean and I oppose the use of the word piracy to mean copying. Is that not how language changes?
Without regard to this particular issue, you also have to concern yourself with the bias of the person determining if the AI has a bias.
We have one like that in the US
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIADRS5NW0...
>Economics doesn't assume that actors are perfectly rational actors

At the undergrad level, it often does. I had a friend who had just become an assistant professor in economics. He was teaching an undergrad class, and wanted to pose a few scenarios to them. While preparing his lecture notes, he called me up and gave me the scenarios and asked how I would behave. These were not "hard" or "wild" scenarios. Mostly day to day stuff.

I gave my answers. On several of them, he told me I was giving irrational answers. This was a problem for him, because if his students answered likewise, they wouldn't support the points he was trying to make in the lecture.

He and I had a similar outlook on life. So I asked him: "Would you behave differently from me?"

Him: "No"

Me: "So what is the value of the economic model you're teaching if even you would not behave the way the theory indicates you would?"

As an aside, and this always comes up when we talk about rationality and economics. The disconnect is often that basic economics courses have a narrow view of people's motives and desires. It is often simplified to "optimizing for money" or "optimizing for time". Rarely things like "optimizing for mental stress". Pretty much everything someone does is for some perceived gain. That gain is often not what economists teach it is.
As a society we believe that allowing people of modest means to be swindled out of their savings is an unacceptable outcome and have enacted a large battery of laws to avoid it.

These laws came about from very real and serious experiences that were, in fact, catastrophic for many communities. It's a real live problem, and it goes back a long way.

If you want to argue about the details that's great, but any discussion has to start with the reality that an unregulated market leads to really unwanted outcomes here.

You can also do the "who cares if people want to get swindled let them" approach, but recognize that you've been outvoted on this topic, we've decided to protect people like we try to protect people from unsafe food, consumer products scams, and many other situations.
This is all happening before the interview, even. The AI, as far as I can see from the article, was just sorting resumes into accept/reject piles, based on the kinds of resumes that led to hire/pass results in the hands of humans.
Not the OP, but the vast majority of the up front cost is in development. Reproduction is relatively cheap, so who's going to pour money into R&D if your formula is just going to be immediately copied and sold at a fraction of the price?