skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe the airport in Minneapolis has this setup. I find it very alienating. I like human interaction when I eat out, it's one of the main reasons I do so.
Realistically, nursing is a job that is far more structured than is being an MD. This allows nurses to function much better as a group.
That's precisely the crux of the matter and the (questionable) reason for the hours. Nursing teams are the stable basis on which the MDs rely on to fight the huge pile of s* * * work that escapes the standard pathways in which we try to shoehorn every patient.
The idea that you can pay for privacy is a fantasy.

Just like in every surveillance state in the past, the people with the most privacy will be the people who are in charge of the surveillance. The people who will be the most monitored are the people who individuals in the surveillance apparatus want something from, or are offended and annoyed by. The civilian government reports to the surveillance apparatus in a surveillance state, not the other way around; and you probably won't even know the name of the person who really runs the country.

If you can see everything that people do, you can destroy them at will. If you can't find anything they've done, you can figure out something they could have done, and extortion easily provides eyewitnesses and covert agents in order to set people up. If necessary, you can extort necessary elements of the justice system to make the decisions you want, or just blatantly do what you want in total daylight, and make sure that nobody ever reports on it, no one is arrested, and witnesses are either securely threatened or disposed of in the same way.

It's depressing that we're arguing about whether public or private surveillance is worse, whether convenience or discounts are worth the exchange, or in this sadly gone awry "left" critique, whether there will be differences between the privacy of the rich and the poor.

Instead, maybe argue about why we've installed microphones every 10 feet that report to central servers in a way that cannot be audited. The technology is the enemy, it's just waiting for the right user.
That's interesting I didn't know Orwell had a connection to the British Ministry of Information. Wikipedia seems to suggest that he didn't work there but his wife did:

>"At the outbreak of the Second World War, Orwell's wife Eileen started working in the Censorship Department of the Ministry of Information in central London, staying during the week with her family in Greenwich. Orwell also submitted his name to the Central Register for war work, but nothing transpired." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell#Second_World_War...

Wikipedia could be wrong though since any work he did for the Ministry might not have been public until recently.
Yeah this is a good one. I've been programming C++ for a long time and it does give you a sense of how hopeless this task is :)
For the same reason why there is environmental regulation not just individual ethical choices of companies; Game theory. If those that make the "right" choices bear the burden of those that make the "wrong" choices then this cost will accumulate and produce a power difference.

If you already know this then why ask the question? If you dont then I can recommend you study some games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_in_game_theory
What's with the old articles?
Ask HN: What's your homescreen look like?
It's a new year and I'm looking to clean up my phone. What's your homescreen look like?
Mozilla the organization are providing to me a piece of software (the browser), which after me downloading it, should have absolutely nothing to do with Mozilla, their services or servers.

Unless, of course, I explicitly instruct the browser to connect there, which is unlikely, because I don't want anything to do with them or with their services.
NAT is only painful for applications that implement arbitrary inbound connections, such as peer-to-peer connections, and applications that use separate control/data connections. The former is understandable because it's necessary, the latter is arguably lazy application developers.

Peer-to-peer is largely solved with UPnP port forwarding, but most of these apps can also at least be configured to use a specific port range, education can then be configured on the router to forward.

Then the are the badly designed protocols. That's perhaps a bit harsh, they have their reasons, but using multiple ports is a bit lazy vs using encapsulated packets (eg where you can send either a control or data packet over a single connection, or even send multiple data streams concurrently, in both directions).

FTP is one example, where a separate port is used for data transfers. This is "simple" from the perspective that the data port just contains the raw file contents, no extra encoding, but very painful from a network point of view. I used to support web hosting customers around 2000, when ftp was commonly used for maintaining site content, and people didn't understand when to use PASV mode, server operators didn't always setup the firewall to allow inbound data ports, and occasionally you'd run into the worst case of both client and server behind NAT.

SIP is another example. It uses multiple streams, but is built assuming everything has a public IP. The message it uses to setup this stream includes the system's IP address, which is the private non-routable IP when behind NAT.

Contrast these to a multiplexing protocol like HTTP/2, where it's basically transparent to network operators (still just a single TCP connection on 80 or 443). There's many other examples of multiplex use in more proprietary systems: online gaming, for example, sends different packet types over a single connection -- it doesn't require a separate "movement" and "shoot" port for each connected player. Most sites/apps using web sockets also work like this, with each piece of data encapsulated inside a message wrapper (usually JSON).

I'm being a bit unfair, because FTP predates NAT, and SIP was being created around the same time -- though I'd argue SIP's assumptions about the network environment (and seeming compete ignorance of NAT) were both poor and unnecessary.
No, I think that argument makes perfect sense. A stateful firewall doesn't depend on NAT but you get all the downsides of NAT from a working stateful firewall in default-deny mode: you still have to talk the firewall into allowing the relevant traffic through, and without that you still have connections that work in one direction and not the other. The only thing that's different is address discovery, but you can solve that by just asking the firewall what public address to use at the same time that you ask it to open the port. (Or curl whatismyip.akamai.com or something.)

So if NAT is a problem for your application, so are the stateful firewalls implicitly envisioned by those who advocate for assigning unNATted public addresses to devices on home networks.
In the readme there's a link to kubernetes slack. Anyone know how can I get an invite to join the workspace?
I've always thought that facebook wouldn't exist if you had workable P2P for consumers.
Chrome isn't the only other option. There are tons of browsers that are more respectful of user privacy than Firefox:

- Firefox (but fixed with settings that are hidden from the user for some reason)

- IceCat, Waterfox, Pale Moon, etc.

- Ungoogled Chromium, Iridium, Qutebrowser, etc.

Mozilla's actions (Cliqz spyware integration, ads in the browser, Google analytics in the browser, locked enabled telemetry, etc.) show that their "commitment" to user privacy is just marketing.
This is why I like lower taxes. The government should be so desperate for money that it would have had to be more reasonable with which cases it chooses to pursue.
Scientists engineer more efficient plant metabolism, increasing crop growth 40%
It's the old "dilution is the solution to pollution" mantra. The world seems so huge, and a cigarette butt so small. It's obviously a fallacy. Because there are just so damn many people.

What persists are the mouthpiece (plastic) and filter (synthetic fiber). Tobacco degrades very quickly, and paper within a year or so.

So when I smoked, I never left butts behind. For one thing, I was typically short of money, so I kept the tobacco in a small bag. I mainly smoked hand-rolled cigarettes, and typically balled up the paper, and put it in a pocket. Sometimes I just dropped the paper, I admit. And sometimes I even saved it, for reuse.

But I've also made the argument that people are quite comfortable polluting in ~invisible ways. For example, let's say that there's a road full of motor vehicles. And someone flicks out a butt. Fellow drivers will typically grumble, or yell at them. But they don't realize that they're all polluting far more, through emissions of SO2, NOx, CO2, hydrocarbons, particulates, and so on.
it's subjective of course, but I find context manager decorators very pythonic, I still remember the 'whoa! that's beautiful' moment when I 1st learned about them.

But most importantly, generators as enclosures are used everywhere today with the whole async-await paradigm.
I think there is a role for government, but the last thing I want is to give the federal government more money. They have enough in tax receipts to take care of infrastructure, feeding people, providing health care to those who can’t afford it etc.

Why would anyone suggest giving the federal government more money? The states in general do more in general to actually help everyday Americans.
Imagine sunshine from an oblique angle on matte glass. The matte surface defuses the light, making the translucent object brighter than the background.
"People incapable of guilt do tend to have a good time."
The writing was on the wall for a long time...

Best that people can do in the future will be to make the tools as cheap and accessible as possible so we wont have major genetic data monopolies acting as a walled garden that they can reap the benifts from the most... though they’ll be the head honchos in town for awhile until then.
> [Why is a global variable zero?] Because i has static storage duration, it’s initialized to unsigned zero. Why, you ask? Because the standard says so.

No, it's because i lives in an area allocated at the OS level, and OS has to have initialized that memory with something (otherwise you'd have a security bug). The .bss segment has been zeroed, for obvious reasons, since the advent of modern linkage.

The explanation is backwards. The reason that stack variables are UNinitialized is (contra the article which thinks it's because the programmer didn't put an initializer in the source code) that memory is on the stack, which is allocated internal to your program and in practice was used previously by some other call for some other purpose.

The fact that stack variables are uninitialized by default is actually an intentional feature, not a bug, as it correctly expresses the behavior of the runtime environment. Now, it may not be a good feature, and modern language designs have omitted it (by, let's remember, relying on much better modern compilers to elide all the extra code that would otherwise have been needed to zero out a stack frame!).

But it's got nothing to do with the syntax of the language. You can rely on .bss being zero in assembly, and similarly be surprised that stack memory is going to have junk in it.
Meanwhile, using persistent data structures instead of objects avoids the problem space entirely.
You're really persisting in missing the point. I am no threat to Raytheon, or the class of people who work there, or the ruling elite of the country who think burning Yemeni children alive is a good idea as long as we teach women to participate in STEM careers.

If I were and could get my message out (people are trying on youtube; they're being censored), well, no doubt my life would be worth girl scout cookies. I'd be unpersonned at the very least.

FWIIW yes, I am being stopped from voting for politicians who would make this state of affairs end. Just as effectively as Chinese people are.
I'm not really sure why job creation is the appropriate moral metric. At the end of the day people who get wealthy generally are 'leveraging' (to be polite) the work of others. i.e. They are taking the profit from the work of others. If you can do something which is directly wealth creating without employing anyone then arguably you are more entitled to the money you earn. Ceteris paribus.

Not an argument that can be settled here, but the moral argument for job creators has to be that it is not a near zero sum game (i.e. it is not the case that if you don't create jobs then someone else will) and that they are systemically important. That is if we remove (magically/without shock) some of the current crop of job creators we would end up with an economic depression and as such they are an important societal good.
I don't think "I have too much money, take it away" is the right way to look at it. It's more about "the government needs $X to do what we tasked it with doing, isn't it unfair that I pay a smaller share than you"
Not thinking about the future of your code is a great way to get your 9-5 done, but not a great way to actually write software.

Honestly, it sounds like you're hourly, and not at all related to what the submission is talking about...
This feels like a problem the free market would have solved. Pay $x00/year or so, get a browser that doesn't track you or serve ads, and doesn't remove features that the userbase liked. But that hasn't happened, so I'm clearly vastly misunderstanding things here.
Do you have an idea of how much 8-hour shifts would cost? It is not pretty. It is doable, but has numerous drawbacks as well. The first being that you would not want to have surgery done by someone trained on 8-hour shifts without a complete rehaul of medical education that would also cost you an arm and a leg.
Ordinarily, reposts of older articles are pretty welcome, but this one would have been marginal (for HN) even on the day it first ran.
What do women want? (2009)
In 2010 in Denmark there was an initiative done for people wanting to pay more in taxes - people who claimed in the public debate, that they really wanted to pay more.

The tax department opened up a bank account, that people could pay in extra taxes for, if they wanted. If you felt like you should pay more, you could.

Two years later, the initiative was shut down - having accumulated about 15000USD (fifteen THOUSAND) - in a country with 5.5M inhabitants.

A lot of people want OTHERS to pay more in taxes and some people SAY they should pay more in taxes to score some cheap karma-points. Almost nobody ACTUALLY want to pay more in taxes.
Great example of why I never liked OO. It always seemed so complicated.
> The only thing that does create jobs is consumer demand for products and services that people can make and provide, not my investment dollars.

And what is being “demanded”? Products and services that are the result of investments made earlier in time. Consumer demand is the inherent PAYOFF of successful investment. Consumers demand more, faster, cheaper, better. None of that comes without investment first.

This guy sees investment as leeching off the productive economy. Probably because he has only ever been on the “money-shuffling” side of things, rather than standing in the shoes of a business owner who needs to raise capital to create something new.

That capital comes from either loans or equity, both of which require 1) substantial sums of latent savings in the economy, and 2) money-shufflers to find allocation opportunities (capital does not yet, alas, allocate itself).

Investment is the LAST thing we should tax. Consumption (especially of positional and rivalrous goods) is the first.
No one has stopped you from paying more. IRS is always happy to take donations.
Another way to deal with this problem is to simply get rid of filters. Let people that smoke die from cancer earlier & maybe fewer people will smoke. Maybe offer a re-usable filter?
Tls was a software upgrade for nearly everything. In fact just by building newer devices that software was just there and ready. Ipv6 is not just a software upgrade.
No. Norwegian love Indian food, for example, and there are several popular Scandinavian foods that are a bit smelly.

Most people don't bring leftovers, though. They typically pack open sandwiches that they make themselves.

A lot of companies have kitchen areas that they keep stocked. People typically make sandwiches (open, again!) and salads. I've never seen anyone hear anything in a microwave.
Yes, it is. You appear to be conflating my point of how healthcare is changing with regard to payment structures with clinical guidelines which tend to have potentially more subtleties.

There are some areas of healthcare where it is very cut and dry what defines good healthcare management. These are where we've developed good reporting outcomes that tie closely to clinical and resource utilization outcomes from the published literature. Think of your high volume routines cases such as diabetes (monitoring of A1C)[0] and knee replacements [1] that make of a large portion of health care cases. These are certainly not covering all healthcare episodes, but represent areas where significant fat can be trimmed.

With regard to your above clinical case, there are specific approaches for (what I assume is an incidental finding from a coronary CTA) reporting lung nodules and requesting follow up studies [2]. However, this represents an area where there is significant good faith professional disagreement of reporting.

I will agree that high-evidence clinical guidelines are not always followed, and payment reform has not been influenced all medical professions equally. The way healthcare is delivered is changing, and is being highly influenced by national policy level decisions.

[0]: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hpb20121011.90233/f...
[1]: http://files.kff.org/attachment/Evidence-Link-FAQs-Bundled-P...
[2]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5903561/
What I’m seeing down here in NZ/Australia are repeated anecdotal cases of restaurants being charged with abusing immigrant(mostly legal and some illegal overstayer) employees.

The abuse typically involves underpayment in the form of fixed income and unlimited hours, or required overtime without additional pay as per employment law.

More recently, I’ve become aware of two major fast food franchises with a cheap labour scam so common it must be known or knowingly ignored by the franchisors(1 in Aus, 1 in NZ).

It is a scheme where immigrants are sponsored for work visas in entry level exempt fast food management jobs working unlimited hours for $60k salary a year.

The problem is the immigrants pay back $60k thru seperate channels for the opportunity, effectively becoming indentured servants for 1 year.

That is so incredibly unethical and immoral, if not illegal(unsure about that, but questionable quasi-legal at best).

I can understand, if not sympathize, with how and why this has come about.

Looking in from the outside, the fast food and quick casual restaurant industry is ruthlessly competitive and cannibalistic.

Restaurant owners/franchisees and franchisors would be well aware of such financial subsidy benefitting directly(franchisee bottom line) & indirectly(franchisor P&L leverage to push for higher reinvestment/co-marketing).

Just because immigrants are willing/able to agree to a fixed term indentured servitude, doesn’t make it ok.

I’m a legal immigrant myself and I have a legal immigrant starting his first day tomorrow(after a 6 month search).

We only had the opportunity to employ him after he was poorly treated(due to leveraging him with implied threats with his work visa) here in NZ and after he was poorly treated in Qatar and Bahrain previously.
Tobacco had a longstanding religious significance here in North America, that's how I was first introduced to it and I still appreciate it as part of sweat lodges or similar events. It makes more sense to me viewed in that light, a good analogy might be the bread and wine of a catholic mass.
Solid recommendations - anyone can get a long way fast with Gatsby/Firebase

I'd only add NextJS as an option for the runway it offers
and Meteor/Apollo/AWS as an alternative in that case.
This era of data business is such a mental papercut..
The article specifically addresses that, providing examples from different car manufacturers about how they treated their workers differently. (The company culture, the additional responsibilities they were given, etc.)

The article is 7,000 words long, but it has a lot to say about the culture at factories where cars are produced.
I oversimplified in my previous post.

You're usually going to get to a result that's slightly better than random agreement by applying some really-not-all-that-impressive baseline strategy like looking for bag-of-words overlap between a question and a known factoid for which you have a stored answer. This strategy is easy to fool: If you have a factoid like "Dogs that chase cats are dangerous" and a question is asked like "Are cats that chase dogs dangerous?", then it might answer "Yes" because it matches the stored fact: But the answer will actually be "Yes" in more than 50% of all cases. Since dogs tend to chase cats, and cats tend not to chase dogs, the concept of cats chasing dogs is less likely to come up in a question answering context than the concept of dogs chasing cats. There are obviously numerous other ways that this is going to fail, like "Trump believes the world is flat" might be a factoid and the question might be "Is the world flat?".

The result I previously oversimplified should more correctly be stated as follows: Anwers coming from the "artificial intelligence" systems submitted for the conference were analyzed to see if any answer they gave represented a deviation from the baseline that fixed an error in the baseline, versus introduced an error that the baseline wouldn't have made. The submissions were then analyzed to see if there was a pattern whereby more errors would be fixed than introduced. It was found that the statistical pattern was basically that random deviation was introduced into the baseline, and systems that, as a result of such random deviations scored very badly weren't submitted at the conference, thus generating a scores that were consistently more likely to be better than baseline rather than worse-than-baseline, but not in a meaningful way.

To reiterate the source: It can be found on page 43 here:

http://richard.bergmair.eu/pub/thesis.pdf

But that applies to the old RTE conference. So it would be interesting to see if the same holds true here.
Any individual or corporation is free to donate directly to the US General Fund, which is where the vast majority of tax revenue goes: https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/resources/faq/faq_public...

In the meantime, I need as much of the money that _I earned_ as the gov't will deign to let me keep. Why? None of your damn business, that's why. I earned it, let me save or spend it as I please, without even more of gov't sticky-fingers rooting around in my damn pie.
You’re kind of both lionizing and straw manning the same persona, just from different generations. Pretty odd
iOS Natural Language Processing in 6 lines of code