skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The US is currently only the 10th largest exporter of food to the UK. “For the USA to replace the combined food imports from the other nine in the top 10 would require a vast food flotilla and logistics operation exceeding that of the 1940-45 Atlantic convoys.”

https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/sep/15/food-and-brexit...
EU friendly remote companies by remoteur.com: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s0nqmTW7zfZNqHXuwjsB...
"Popular soverignty" has no place in British constitutional history, only in Scotland; the traditional settlement is based on Parliamentary soverignty.
I'm more interested in the lead-in period before one is senile but when the brain (memory in particular) isn't what it used to be.

I'd love sidekick software that helps remember things and can be queried very quickly and easily.
Their own crawler is not used for organic search results. See sibling comment.
Medium's pitch has changed several times over the years
XRP Classic: A botched attempt at ripping off Ripple
But only if Brexit isn’t being done, right?

Not living in the UK, but I would guess that as stupid as Remainers might think Brexit is and Brexiters are, it‘s a whole other ballgame to assume that because they are stupid you are entitled to nullify a vote.

And because of that, even though a lot in the EU are rooting for it, I doubt a second referendum is going to take place.

Even die-hard remainers would ask themselves: Is being part of the EU, is being ecomically better off (or at least more stable in the near-term) worth to taint our democracy (or as you point out even go to riots and worse)?
Thanks for sharing your feedback, I certainly hear those points often and they are understandable concerns. I'll provide feedback below for others who may share these concerns:

Biopharma is a high risk investment, but I'd challenge the notion that biotech investing is any more risky than tech, and suggest it's potentially more rewarding. In the last few years biotech VCs have actually done better than tech VCs [0]. Most exits happen years before FDA approval. Of the 46 major VC-backed biotech IPOs in 2018, the average company went public 3-4 years after founding and was in Phase 1 clinical studies.

Recently there have been several biotech startups that went from first VC round to $8-10B+ exit in less than five years. Kite Pharma, which was acquired for $12B 5 years after Series A, grew to that size faster than SpaceX, Twitter, Pinterest or Dropbox.

You do need knowledge of life science to invest in biotech, but you don't necessarily need a PhD. I know successful biotech CEOs, VCs, hedge fund investors, etc who don't have science backgrounds. And even PhDs find that their expertise, which is in a very narrow field, does not apply to technical evaluations of other fields. A cancer biologist will not be an expert in pharmacodynamics, toxicology, clinical trial design, or protein engineering. You do diligence in biotech by finding experts in all of those areas and drawing upon their knowledge.

A cell biology 101 course won't make you a good investor, but neither will a PhD. Most of what you learn in a PhD or undergrad bio degree won't help with biotech investing, and you will still need to learn a lot after getting those degrees. The best way to learn how to invest is to do it, only investing what you can afford to lose, and under the guidance of experienced investors. PhDs or MDs absolutely help, and are the best way to learn about science, but are they the best way to learn biotech investing?

The course wouldn't make you a successful biotech investor, but it would provide a foundation for people to learn more efficiently. I think that if you actively invested in biotech for 5 years with guidance from mentors -- even with no science background -- you'd be a better biotech investor than if you did a PhD without doing much investing

[0] https://lifescivc.com/2016/11/biotech-venture-capital-mythbu...
"WTO terms" aren't what you think they are. They aren't a fully-developed agreement between nations to trade.

They are basicslly just a framework. You still need to negotiate with each other.

For example, the other country will want papers with your goods. Which forms needs to be filled out? With which information? The WTO doesn't regulate that. You still need to agree on all the technicalities.

You only get some limit on tariffs for free, basically.
Disabling the Google apps hasn't lead me to need time maintaining my phone. Disabling Play Services and Play Store makes things a hassle, but stuff like Google Drive or Google Play Music doesn't.
Is it not an implementation of double jeopardy?

Since the referendum new facts have come to light, that of what an exit deal would look like. New facts should allow for a new vote.

If remain had won, there would be no new facts so why would another vote be justified?
So far every expert prediction about Brexit had been wrong. The UK was meant to be in a deep recession by now, remember?
> All I can think of is, why?

Because Remainers don't want Brexit at all, and Leavers mostly don't want it on the terms of the available deal (split between those who want a better deal and would prefer remaining to leaving on the offered terms and those who would prefer no deal to the offered terms.)

> This is insanely puzzling to me, and very much unexpected.

That no one liked the deal May managed to negotiate has been clear for some time—it's why the vote was delayed for weeks of desperate effort to find some votes—though it being by far the biggest loss on any vote for a British Government pretty much ever is somewhat impressive. But it's also a sign that May wanted the loss on record—they had to have a whip count and known it would be a horrible defeat and yet went forward with it.
Thought it was a bit funny, because 10*0=0, most people has probably never read a privacy policy.

Still, good point!
The best recommendation to be secure from your linked article:

> Use a bluetooth keyboard for easier typing.
Very true. Especially since the equity value of a startup basically looks like an out of the money call option where you're paying a small amount now for a potential large payoff of our money (but high chance of $0 outcome). Also, more volatility will increase the value of this option (whether it's founder or market volatility - aka Travis from Uber or Cypto or Cannabis).
or a desktop/windows app. Back then we'd be more likely to call them programs.
I have a simple rule in my life: Anything that is addictive is harmful to us. Coffee falls in that bucket.
I'm actually not sure the nebulousness of the original Leave plan is the problem - if it was, I'd expect significant changes in where people stand on the issue, or fear of the No Deal option, which doesn't seem to be the case.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/0...

> Overall, 41% of people now think it was right for Britain to vote Leave, while 47% believe it was the wrong decision – but this does not necessarily translate into support for stopping the process.

> Asked what we should do next, 28% of people want to stop Brexit entirely, while 8% would hold a second referendum to decide matters.

---

> Some suggest Government had hoped the risk of No Deal would force support for the deal on the table. But while No Deal is an unpopular option, it doesn't necessarily seem as intimidating as expected.

> Part of this appears to be a lack of understanding - only 56% of people realize that "No Deal" means exactly that, leaving the European Union without any deal at all. Strangely, 26% think it that it actually includes a deal, to ensure a smooth transition or a formal transition period.

> While 49% say they would be worried by a No Deal Brexit, these are overwhelmingly Remain voters - 38% of the public as a whole, and 70% of Leave voters the idea doesn’t worry them.

> Three quarters (76%) of Leave voters think warnings of No Deal disruption are exaggerated or entirely invented. Put simply, Leave voters did not believe warnings about the damage Brexit could cause in 2016, and don't believe them now.
you could also achieve the same (or very close) result with CSS gradients alone.
"Investment income" is certainly a good example of "passive income." But it seems when investment income is touted as the only true form of passive income, it is forgotten that, in most cases, some outlay of effort was required to first generate the initial investment.

Likewise, many projects that require some initial effort upfront may eventually produce income with little to no continuing involvement. Passive income.
Why should I quit my job and become a goat farmer?
Google shows “USD to PKR” as 50% less
I think of not wasting time on yak shaving as a sign of cognitive advancement, not cognitive decline! It's not that I can't shave yaks like I used to. It's that I realize that shaving yaks is a stupid waste of time that could be spent doing something productive or fun.

Of course, if one enjoys shaving yaks, then by all means, shave away! But don't shave a yak just to prove that you can, and don't sneer at the people who don't - just because they don't shave your yak doesn't mean they can't. It means their priorities are different than yours.
This seems to be the "magic" solution for all the logical inconsistencies of the brexit position - ignore the problem and pretend it will magically solve itself. Know of any other land borders between different customs regimes which take this approach?
The study is likely useless since eight weeks total does not constitute long-term effects. You’d need to do this with a larger sample size over years to get reliable data.
The EU's plan from the start has been to make the process so painful as to dissuade anyone else from trying. Martin Selmayr was boasting that he has managed to trap the UK.
That's certainly the standard narrative - Berry isn't as counter-cultural as he thinks. He's just the mirror image of convention, but that buys in equally to the false nature/culture dichotomy.

We don't 'interact' with nature. There's no getting outside of it to do the interaction. When we 'take more than we need', we're acting exactly as a hominid with tribal cognitive & affective adaptations that have been turned to extended purposes in a global context would act. In other words: evolution in creating H. Sapiens has explored an area of state space that will result in large-scale ecological collapse. This is unfortunate, from our present-day point of view, but it is not unnatural.
Here are some articles to get you started.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/surveillance-te...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/1209...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/the-new-w...

National data from intelligence agencies are provided to municipal police through "fusion centers". Different cities provide their own data into these centers (e.g. Seattle recently built and tore down a city-wide camera surveillance system) which are consumed in the other direction. Threat scoring software use various data feeds including those from social media platforms.
So gambling by insurance companies is ok, just not people. Unless it is an insurance co-op (which I think would be great), there is always entity on the other side with the concentrated risk.

It seems so many laws are about protecting people from themselves, but then we need exceptions from them for society to work at all. Like you can't legally invest in a non-listed company if you are not an accredited investor. Maybe we should make this distinction more formal and universal. Society could have an official and transparent way a person could enter the class of people who are expected to be responsible for their actions.
Especially when you consider it's the old that voted for Brexit. This stuff about riots is overplayed, if it was going to happen it would have started already.
British Euroskepticism has been a political force for decades and the risk of a Brexit has always been an implicit source of negotiating leverage for the UK.
The "technique" shown here is to convert a jpg to a png. As you would expect, this does not work for all images.
Cryptocurrency is wholly impractical to the point of being totally useless with regard to displacing trust in centralized institutions.
Veil prediction market and derivatives platform built on Augur, launches Mainnet
That's complicated because you're changing your bet as the odds move, which is pretty gambly.

If you were doing both bets before the game started, at about the same time, then the second bet would effectively not be gambling. Not because of your motivation, exactly, but because it reduces the variance in how much money you'll have at the end of the game.

If you buy a matched pair of tickets so that you guarantee a $60 output, that's not gambling. Even if you come out ahead no matter what. (who was dumb enough to sell that to you?)

Let's say you had a bet on team A forced upon you, because of where you live or something. At that point buying a matching bet on team B is an anti-gambling behavior that removes variance from the system. It's the equivalent of insurance.

If you then keep buying team B, then you're gambling in the other direction. If you buy so much insurance that you make a profit on losing items, you're gambling. But that's not how insurance normally works. It normally pays out less then what you lose, because of deductibles and the time wasted.
Disabling Play Services will prevent many "store" marketed apps from installing/working, i.e., execution will stop and the user will get those ridiculous coercive or cryptic messages. F-Droid apps will of course work fine. However at least on the phones I have tried one can disable Play Services, disable the Play Store, and Google Maps will still work. No Google account needed.
That's correct, we're not able to fast charge at these levels without approval from the OEM because of the limits they have built. We need to either be integrated inside of the vehicle, or on the charger but have the vehicles "approval" for charging at these higher rates, as at Level 3 and up it's DC to the pack.
This doesn't prevent purchases outright, but it allows limitations on frequency and vendor: https://privacy.com
I don’t think it’s the cup that leeches plastic, unless it contains BPA.
Maps on macOS already supports dark mode so it’s likely just a matter of time.
Do you honestly think it is healthy for democracy if the UK is forced into remaining?
I agree that DCFs are valuable in driving into assumptions. Taking a few "market" DCFs and seeing for which assumptions your view diverges from market is very helpful
"regular" or "poor"?

I would argue that the neighbourhoods above are just representations of the other side of the spectrum. Not where "regular" people live.
This allows Apple to continue selling their hardware and software to people living in China (of which there are a lot). This is not a problem with Apple, but a problem with China.
This is clearly the real reason smokers get cancer. They aren't drinking their dark roast.
They can invoke and revoke at will. The other side can just refuse to do any further negotiations because of bad faith, leaving staying in or hard exit as the only options.
Or the jobs will disappear.
I've found the things like ""experiences" and related offerings to be a red flag over their capacity to grow or keep their advantage.

Still, they are killing it, truly.
It seems discussion of capital gains taxation was omitted?
Project Alias: Giving users more control over their smart assistants
Disclaimer: I work for Red Hat on Fedora. Take that for what you will

As far as I know, the desire is to get better numbers on how much the parts of Fedora are being used. There is always more work to do than there are folks to do all of it; having better numbers on how much different bits are being used helps us make better decisions on what to focus on.

Granted, I'm not Matt but I've heard him talk about similar things and have run into the issue myself - "Is anyone even using this? Is it worth putting this level of effort into this particular thing?"

EDIT: Phrasing of the last sentence
> ...because the ONE thing I almost always want to see first is exactly the "Continue watching" section.

And that's precisely why you occasionally have to work for it, scrolling through other new content in between.

Apparently shoving other content beats the relatively small amount of criticism they get for those few extra user interactions.
Pacific Grove, too. I was just staying in an AirBnB in PG in October. Signs in yards opposing "measure M" which turned out to be an initiative to "keep Pacific Grove a community"... which means no short-term rentals.
This is how so many developers ended up on OS X.

They wanted bash and the command line, but they got tired of dicking around with their machine all day.
`var` is entirely syntactic sugar (compile-time type inference) and there's no runtime cost associated with it.

I find it makes most (but not all) code more readable, particularly given that we have great IDEs/tooling in the .NET world.
On the Conservative side - many of the remain MPs come from leave constituencies. Also, as a party, the Conservatives have a strong leave bias. If the leave does not happen, it is hard to see the Tories making it back to power for a considerable time.
Insurance is good. Gambling is bad. How could they be the same thing?
I have friends who worked at Craigslist, and was astonished to hear them describe a team of IIRC 35-40 employees. They have somewhere around 50 now? Makes you wonder what those 3k+ employees at Twitter all do.
For #2 canaries are commonly run against the stable/“production” deployment on some sort of periodic basis. This is used to approximate a customer experience and detect faults in underlying components, intermediate infrastructure, or changes outside of “the software” like configuration data. Its an adjunct or backstop to metric based anomoly detection. From what Ive seen.

Edit: as an aside theres a very interesting area of discusssion around the spectrum of integration tests, canaries, & user experience monitoring. If you change the periods and the sources they seem to blend in to the same outcome. Ie write your integ tests to cover the ux. Run them continuosly. Associate results with underlying inputs. Suddenly theyre very much the same thing.
> You speak of "tracking" as if it's all the same thing.

True, and that's bad of me. I'm speaking in shorthand.

> Every sale you make at a store is tracked

But the store does not track me if I don't use a card. Returns are handled through the receipt that they give me during the transaction. That's a kind of tracking, but tracking the transaction itself, not me.

> Every time you visit a doctor, they add the info regarding your visit to a log. That's tracking. Tracking itself is not bad.

Indeed, and here's where I'll try to introduce the shades of gray I left out. I consent to the doctor tracking me to that extent (but I would object strongly if the doctor started keeping track of my whereabouts or what I was doing). The doctor even gives me a consent form affirming that. If I'm not OK with the tracking, I don't see that doctor. Software is no different in this sense.

I oppose tracking that I don't give affirmative consent for. In the case of Red Hat's purpose, I will not give such consent, as the cost/benefit ratio is not sufficiently weighted to the "benefit" side.

> is just FUD and an indicator or how broken human communication fundamentally is.

It's not FUD, as I'm not claiming that Red Hat is intending to do anything nefarious. And I don't see this as a human communication problem.

Speaking personally, this is a reaction to the trend in software and online to engage in massive amounts of user tracking and data collection, both disclosed and undisclosed, that has resulted in real harm (both intentional and unintentional).

Once bitten, twice shy and all of that. This is a problem that comes from real misbehavior of software companies, not from poor communications.
"the will of the people" sounds very grand and final.

"the will of 52% of the people" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

I'm not claiming that I don't understand the concept of referendum by simple majority - merely that there's a certain duplicity in the sanctimonious language being used to describe the result.
In order to get their VAT back, exporters from the EU also need to get their papers checked against the actual goods and stamped. This takes hours for every truck.

That is irrespective of whether the importing country lifts all tariffs.

> https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/taxation/vat/vat-rules...

If enough trucks with TVs and car parts clog the borders, then the food-trucks (who might get some sort of special treatment) are also clogged. They will be clogged 50 miles before they reach the border.
Yeah, to me the initial referendum, because of the complete lack of information on what the actual deal would be, is about as useful as an opinion poll for actually informing the future of the UK re the EU.

(US user)
It's entirely possible that the poor image quality is the display but the poor low light performance is definitely the sensor.
A border will do nothing against illegal EU immigration. I doubt any brexit scenario will result in EU nationals requiring a visa to enter the UK (for short term stays). A border is not what will prevent them from overstaying.
Do it in Washington State and it is a class C Felony.
This is probably true in the US, but in Europe I bet you would find that smokers drink espresso (which is usually made with dark roast coffee). Even for "regular strength" black coffee, people tend to drink "americano", which is espresso diluted with water. In the UK, in particular, I'm astounded at the volume of dark roast coffee people drink in the morning.
Might not be misplaced if the commenter _is_ a bureaucrat
Your claim that the vote is the most reliable data we have flatly contradicts your last paragraph: 61% of men and 80% of women aged 18-24 voted Remain. The Leave vote was very much carried through by the older generation. The polarity is such that if you
assume the same proportion of remain voters for those below 18 (and I don't see why not) then the tables turned last November.
That last example is beautiful. Imagine someone in court saying "I am not strong enough to do thing x, which is easier than thing y". It sounds like in this case the judge's (your) response is "but you did y".

I have been a postgraduate in the humanities and I can honestly say I've never seen the conspiracy you seem to be alluding to.
That hypothetical isn't equivalent though. If remain had one the referendum then everything would have just continued as normal. If there had been calls for a second referendum in that case then it would definitely just be a case of calling a vote until you win.

This potential second referendum would be on voting for this actual "deal" or chance of hard Brexit. It would be voting on what May has so far been able to accomplish (or not accomplish). The first referendum was done with no idea on what was going to happen and now the British people can actually see through the lies the Brexiteers made and decide if this is what they actually want. It's much more democratic now that everyone is more aware.

If leave wins again then go right ahead with the hard Brexit, it's what people want. If remain wins then the people have decided against shooting themselves in the foot.
Then they wouldn't have joined in the first place. The "join" vote was 67/33 in favor, 2/3rds, but not 3/4ths.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_C...
This is very cool, thanks for resubmitting it, I actually checked out the source code this time, as opposed to last time only reading the readme.

Having learned all that you needed to in order to write (and rewrite) this, do you have any similar future projects in the works?
I don't pay attention to renewable energy marketing, but I don't think they attack Exxon as much as DDG attacks Google.

I think a closer analogy is health food companies advertising that misrepresents the benefits of organic foods.