skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel the same. When looking into some new linux distros out of curiosity, I'm noticing a trend that these new devs are putting it on source forge and immediately I am "turned off." Its not rampant but it has happened enough for me to hope this isn't going to be an escalating practice.
My Restaurant Was the Greatest Show of Excess (Joe Beef)
Gotcha, thanks! As for lot size, I know I mentioned round lots, but I typically trade odd lots out of convenience. What does this cost me in practice? Am I missing out on any investor protections that only apply to round lots?
There certainly are mass stabbings though...
Google can be fun if you make it a point to work on stuff that actually matters and not just rest and vest. But I do wish they'd reconsider their abusive IP clauses. Which they won't until they begin to struggle with hiring good people.
But that is absolutely useless rule to use when the whole point of determining if work is done on your own time is to determine if the work done is legally your work or company work, since it becomes a circular argument.
> It’s common for a programmer to want to write an algorithm that tries to beat the market.

Is it? I'm pretty sure that I don't personally know a single programmer who has done this.
So the pinephone looks interesting, but genuinely asking, why is the only product lineup people link on a forum post? I would have figured they had a store or.something?
I built a backtesting platform and my own DSL to interface with TA I created in SQL. Great learning experience - and humbling.
Gimlet has an NPR narrative style that doesn’t work for everyone and can be a little too much.
One product worth checking out might be simpleanalytics.io. its a small company that doesn't track your data. And its cheap. Not entirely sure of your use case but ive seen a good amount of people saying screw the data collectors Ill roll my own and it seems some of what you might be looking for is available from simple (I have no affiliation, just appreciate alternatives to the huge tech companies)
How to Decentralize Social Media–A Brief Sketch
Free speech is being able to say what you want (as long as it isn't screaming fire in a crowded theater or yelling in a library or such like these) without consequences. A society where every website bans you for believing X but yhe government doesn't throw you in jail might respect the first amendment, but it doesn't respect free speech.
Top Web Design Trends for 2019
What do you do when the idea that made you start a new company 8 years ago, made you get up every morning, doesn't do it for you now, and all of your equity is tied up in your old idea?

I don't think I have that kind of stamina. When you cash out there's no guarantee the next person will do a better job than you did.
It's possible to be right about the universe and the galaxy but wrong about the earth. The 90% that is accurate is still accurate even if another 10% is wrong.

More pointedly - we are all in the same position as the flat-earther you posit. None of us have 100% accurate knowledge - meaning some percentage of what we believe is either false or one day will be proven false. We all have blind spots. Flat earthers have a particularly egregious blind spot. So we can be skeptical of other claims they make. But we should still engage with the stuff that makes sense and coheres. The answer to bad science is more science; the answer to bad speech is more speech.
You don't understand. Google claims ownership even on the stuff that you do on _your own_ time, like nights and weekends, without using _any_ Google resources. Even if this stuff is in no way related to what you do at work.
Hmm. I guess I need to start carrying post-it notes when I fly.
It's probably something like configuring a kernel and enabling way too many options. The guy's probably flipped a shitload of switches and there's a chance neither of the kids will boot correctly.
Things shouldn't be democratic. Governments should be.

Both corporations and charitable foundations often emulate democratic governments in some ways, most notably in their shareholder and/or board meetings. There's nothing wrong with emulating the good parts of democracy in other suitable contexts. But I'm not sure whether it's worthwhile to emulate them in every context.

Even when things are run democratically, it is sometimes better to limit participants to those who are directly involved. Would you like some democratic input from the general public as to what happens in your bedroom between consenting partners, for example?
Here's a fairly slow obfuscated Fibonacci function in Python I wrote a long time ago:

f=lambda n:(4<<n*(3+n))//((4<<2*n)-(2<<n)-1)&~-(2<<n)

As you can see it's a strictly integer arithmetic closed form. Bonus points to those who can figure out how it works.
I average 12%-20+% yearly. I like to look at companies with a good PEG (price to earnings over growth) on a PEG of 1.00 or less unless their are good fundamentals. I like companies with a low P/E. I like dividends as I can reinvest cash.

My grandfather taught me about how industrials are cyclical and easy to make money on. Gas prices go up in the summer etc. etc.

Reading news means nothing. Understanding the overall picture of the economy, jobs, housing, commodities, macroeconomics (a fundamental understanding which few take time to learn) are key. Interpreting the "news" is important and learning to filter. Most news is (as the article kind of says) telling you what trends are happening. Never buy a trend. The news mostly tells the past. You have to focus on the present and future.

The news is actually talking about recession. The economy is strong at the moment. The news told us oil would never go below $150 a barrel. If you take time to learn the larger picture you would know these things are fear and not true. See the forest for the trees.
Rephrasing from my original comment: Because Google worried about a very supply-limited audience (tech workers, including related non-programmers). Most fields, the ones paying their employees far less and with far fewer perks, don't share that restraint. If these other fields had their current crop of (non-unionized) workers get disgusted, the companies would just get different employees.

There's no shortage of companies with various abusive practices that remain in business. Arbitration agreements, micro-management, strict controls over things as simple as bathroom breaks, even riding the line on wage-theft. I'm very glad to see this particular change, but to say "Google's programmers demanded change and got it, why don't you get with it, un-unionized cashiers at S-Mart!" overestimates the influence of those workers.
You have to come to an understanding that the reason a place is shit is because of this. Revolving doors are actually worse than just a morale problem. Someone quitting isn't just leaving your company, they're taking everything they know about the systems at your company.

My favorite move in tabletop strategy when doing disaster recovery is finding the most important person at the table and going 'Bang, you died driving to work, you can stay but you cannot help anyone'
I really like the personal homepage idea. Reminds me of the iGoogle days.

Anyone know any products / tools to create a simple one consisting of essentially an organized collection of links? I guess any static site generator could work, but would be nice to have an out of the box theme and can show RSS Feeds.
> How do you know they were wrong? Has there been some breakthrough discovery in philosophy?

Of course there has! Gödel! As you said, Russell believed that all of mathematics could be deduced from laws of logic that are true in the most absolute sense. Gödel showed that this is impossible, and his discovery ended Russell's project overnight. Russell was fundamentally mistaken about the nature of mathematics. No two ways about it.

I already linked to the Wikipedia discussion of why Brouwer's idea about the law of the excluded middle, seems no longer to be taken seriously.

> Gödel was wrongest of them all. He was the most extreme Platonist of them all.

Maybe so, I'm afraid I really don't know his philosophy.

> if mathematical formulas mean something -- i.e. refer to something outside them -- what is the nature of that thing, and, more importantly, how do we learn about it?

But the mathematics derives the same with or without associating real-world meaning. Seems to me that this is enough to demonstrate that the mapping to something beyond the mathematics, is something that should be treated as quite separate from the mathematics itself (which is 'merely' axioms + consequences).

Indeed, we see this in action with fields of mathematics that find real-world applications only years after the discovery of the mathematics itself.

Suppose a field of mathematics is found to have several applications. Again, the mathematics is unchanged: the discovered applications are a different beast entirely.

Doubtless I'm not the first to take this line of thought.

> including Hilbert's Formalism, which some gravely mistake for saying mathematics is just what I described

I'm afraid you're ahead of me again here -- that's still on my reading list.

Also, perhaps just a nitpick: nondeterministic Turing machines might differ from deterministic ones in terms of space/time complexity (that's an open problem), but they're just as impotent against non-computable problems. Were you thinking of some kind of probabilistic machine?
> meanwhile we are ignoring actual privacy violations being done by e.g. Facebook or Twitter, or the millions of ad networks (which that webpage has too, btw).

Oh, I don't think we're ignoring those things.
that's a fucking_tragedy indeed lol

Good fortune to you!
> now their hardware abstraction layer, the HAL library, leaves quite a bit to be desired, but it's nice to get a starting point for newbies.

libopencm3 is a very good alternative with a much better license if you're looking to open source your work [0]. They give you some nice examples [1], and a project template [2]. The documentation is okay, but like most doxygen projects, I find it easier to just read the headers myself.

[0] http://libopencm3.org
[1] https://github.com/libopencm3/libopencm3-examples.git
[2] https://github.com/libopencm3/libopencm3-template
I've always wondered what an algorithmic trader actually does. Does an algorithmic trader get to write algorithms like the job title suggests?
If the lawsuit fails he could always create a employer review site, post a bunch of negative reviews of Yelp, and then offer to remove the offending reviews if they purchase an annual subscription.
The World Wonders
This is amazing and the real game changer unlike some gimmicks like notch and similar things.
It's refreshing to finally see something different on the market where all products are basically same since 5-7 year.
The (optional) GPU is a Vivante core, which is great because it's supported by free software drivers and Mesa support. Given the generally good free software support that ST gives, plus the mainline Linux support landing over a year early, this looks like a pretty fun part to play with.
You get that with human languages too. You don't have to talk to other people until you are ready. And almost none of the effort in learning a language goes into practicing speaking either way. I get that traditional approaches of studying languages focus on speaking early on. Just avoid them, they are too broken and crazy inefficient.
I was working on a project for a client in 2002. Our genius project leader, told us to set up a public ftp server... without password. We told him that it was a no solution and super dangerous. As junior devs, in a service company, we were told to simply shut our mouth and do what was ordered. The server was instantly found but they only started to use it during the week-end as a porn server. The hosting company was on fire. This leader is now a director. hehe
You whole theory seems to be that people just need an opportunity to vent their feels and that will cause aggressive or atrocious feelings to subside.

No. However, not letting people speak will make it more likely that they will feel there are no other options for them. That's just common sense. If you take away an option, people feel they have one less option.

This may work great in therapeutic contexts but I'm not willing to accept that it holds true in the world at large.

You're conflating the therapeutic context with the societal context. Sure, therapy is probabilistic, with no guarantees for any given individual. Effectively, you have been straw-manning by conflating the two. In the US, we can vote. We have freedom of speech. This is a big reason why we can resolve differences and exchange power without violence. If you make people feel they only "technically" have freedom of speech, but not really, then they resort to violence. This is just history.

Your conflating the therapeutic context feeds into a narrative your'e pushing about certain people being irredeemable. Certainly, certain individuals in a therapeutic context aren't going to be easily redeemable, if at all. That doesn't mean that entire groups or swathes of the political spectrum or cohorts of political populations should be treated as irredeemable. That way lies madness. The endpoint of that is either violence or camps. However, it is convenient to do such conflating, if one wants to tar a particular subgroup for political reasons.

I don't speak up for extremists. I speak against extremists. There is a widespread manipulation across society and the media where mainstream/fairly centrist people are being tarred as extremists. This too is being prosecuted by extremists.
The parent may agree with you, but they said that in a somewhat obscure way. I believe their point is that companies have many distinct contracts with other companies (good) that contain arbitration clauses, and that employers have a smaller number of distinct contracts with employees (bad) that are duplicated thousands of times over.
An NDA on the contract itself? Sounds shady as hell.
I don't know. But digital design concepts are not that difficult. I don't think there really is a minimum age. Digital design can be taught as a game of building puzzles. Almost like legos. A young kid should be able to pick the basic concepts, I think. You could treat each of the gates as a lego block and go from there.

I think that if you can teach a young kid programming concepts then you should definitely be able to teach them digital design concepts.
> Mispronunciation is no big deal!

I'd argue on the contrary that it is the most important part when starting learning a new language. People easily skip the pronunciation and phonology part of their target language and then hit a barrier while still being at the beginner level because they cannot go further: nobody understand them. Working seriously on that part at the beginning is fundamental not to lost time and waste effort later on. Heck, I've heard people with 3 years of Chinese that still could not make most consonants correctly...
They've had drag-and-drop programmable controllers for at least 18 years, along with electrical bricks with motors, batteries, speed controllers, lights, light detectors, touch sensors, etc. Lego mindstorms.
I don't know if the barrier to entry was all that low...

You needed a computer and modem (until the C64 & ZX-81 came along, you were talking ~$2k including modem, floppy drive, and monitor for an Apple 2, TRS-80, Pet, or similar - adjusted =~$4k today). You needed a dedicated phone line, not nearly as easy to get back then as now.

Plus, you needed to be able to justify the gear - You couldn't do a whole lot with a personal computer back then besides writing, spreadsheets, and gaming. It was absolutely not a 'practical' purchase for 90% of the population.
> However, if we truly want to improve society for everybody, we may need solutions where the existing winners lose in some way.

So, basically, the broken window fallacy?

I don't doubt that philanthropists act out of their own self interest (as do all rational humans) but forcing them to lose seems like just an extension of a zero-sum game argument where someone has to lose in order for them to win in their philanthropising (or whatever the proper word is).
The so-called "Rashomon effect" is mis-named. The point of the film was not that everyone has a different perception of the truth. It was that everybody lies to preserve their sense of self-righteousness, no matter who else it damns, even when they have nothing left to lose.

It was a depiction of Hell.
He was a child genius, known as a bit too egotistical today, but he has made genuine contributions to the field. NKOS has a nice narrative at least, and might be worth reading as a pop sci work, but isn't very scientifically noteworthy in itself.
I imagine if your list is missing anything at all (and it will) then you’ll get slammed in the press for missing it. Skinhead bands are by no means obvious to me, but even if they would have been in your list, you’ll miss something inevitably.
I agreed to that contract and open sourced many thousands of lines of code owned by Google, but still available to me and the rest of the world via github. I don't see the problem. If you could demonstrate your project didn't overlap google business then you could do your own project.
Zzzzzzzz

Shooting balls
Kicking balls
Throwing balls
Hitting balls
Passing balls

Too much ball coverage.
I agree that there is definitely a lot in terms of abuse when it comes to philanthropy and, more specifically, thr foundations that are set up. As always, those people who want to will find a way to cheat the system for their advantage.

That being said, I don't think that it is really fair to extend this to philanthropy as a whole. A good idea isn't bad simply because some people abuse it. It just means that the rules need to be defined more clearly.

Tax deductions make sense to an extent as they encourage donation to charities, and the principle does work. Not perfectly, but to an extent.

While there are obvious cases of charities being used to avoid taxes and the like, there are also other examples. The Biill and Melinda Gates foundation is one of the largest funding bodies of scientific reserach globally.
Bloomberg's 1.8 billion dollar donation to John's Hopkins helps accessibilit for lower income students.

Of course, philanthropies come with challenges. There's always opportunity cost, there are always other areas of funding that could use the money. There will always be people who diisagree with the use of the money.

Of course, there can be a motivation behind some funding. Bloomberg gave to Hopkins because it's his alma mater. Is that completely fair? No. But let's not pretend that the government in the US is completely unbiased with grant allocation and funding...

Philanthropy should never be the only way money is given to worthwhile causes, and not all causes that are funded will be seen as equally important as others. That does not make it bad, though. Private donations should fill a role that the covernment cannot, in that moment, fill. Perhaps that is funding for smaller, experimental projects that have a higher risk of failing. Perhaps it's projects that are beneficial for one state, but not another. Or projects that do not align with the current goals of the administration (e.g. climate change).

Rich people should not be allowed to use charities as a way to avoid taxes. But not every rich person is evil. Some donations may genuinely be given simply to help causes. Even if it's the soup kitchen. The rules imposed on how these bodies are set up should be stricter, yes. But I think that foundations can provide a good balance in funding allocation to the government.
I think 'k' and 'v' are fine for iterating over maps.
Yes, they are a commodity, so either they can invest in their education and skills to make themselves more valuable or make it easier for companies to take on more of that "commodity".

A stronger safety net that would allow unemployment workers to acquire new skill is a much better social endeavor than antiquated labor unions.
For those wondering about that ~: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addition_chain:

”There is no known algorithm which can calculate a minimal addition chain for a given number with any guarantees of reasonable timing or small memory usage. However, several techniques to calculate relatively short chains exist. One very well known technique to calculate relatively short addition chains is the binary method, similar to exponentiation by squaring.”
Joe Montana having a VC firm probably helped
I really appreciate people with convictions. I can see that the Sabbath issue is important to you, I'd only like to point out that, if one is to take it seriously, it's important to realize Sabbath is, and always has been, Saturday, the seventh day of the week.
Google Chrome shows tiles of your most visited links. In mine, HN is first one.
Announcing balenaFin, a carrier board for the Raspberry Pi Compute Module 3 & 3+
Why is everyone astonished when capitalism has incentivized the worst price:quality ratio?
You are confusing "there is no debate taking place" with "I am not involved in the debate".

Sounds like you are trying to disenfranchise, or declare people disenfranchised. Sounds like you're just wishing entire swathes of the mainstream/center to disappear, or keep quiet and put up.
ST fixed their STM32Cube licenses so that most of it is BSD licensed, but yeah I also agree that libopencm3 is great. ST has good datasheets that allow anyone to easily create their own HAL or set things up directly if needed. There's also HALs for other language, such as Rust.
I mean... The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If Bill Gates gives away 49% of the money his investments make a year (hypothetically), he makes money, and he gives money away. If he funds the Series A of a biotech company to help it continue its research and the company then gains value, it's not just investing, it's also philanthropy.
Wait until they start embedding cameras in toilet seats. "For better passenger comfort".
Android App Update Break Nike’s $350 Self-Lacing Shoes
nike stock dropped like 1%, this seems way oversensationalized
Because it means one of two things.

One, Yelp is incompetent enough to make it someone's literal job to open the office in a timely manner at all hours without thinking to have a conversation first that establishes an SLA for that.

Two, they did have such an agreement, but the employee is claiming a religious exception supersedes any such agreement.

Both would be interesting to discuss, but the article doesn't have any details.
Is a 1.05% drop that big of a deal?
Maybe they're were optimizing to hire open source folks, not impress C-level/investors.
The point of unions is to get workers a better deal through collective bargaining. In a company that's growing rapidly, it doesn't make sense for either the employees or the owners / management to worry too much about how the pie is getting divided up. As companies mature and growth slows, employees who aren't unionized are inevitably going to get screwed. In an industry where corporate profits can exceed $1000000 per employee, I'd say we need more unionization.
>Sports run in our DNA. We’re former athletes that come from sports families—Nick’s the son of Hall of Fame Quarterback, Joe Montana.

I'd be more impressed if you had the sons of Johnnie Cochran and Jackie Chiles. This idea, "Let's make money on internet gambling" isn't novel, it's just been a legal nightmare in the USA. And while it's no longer clearly illegal on a federal scope every state will have their own ideas.

Washington state, for example, made online poker a felony long before the federal government got around to closing all the sites. Even now the Native Americans have introduced a bill making sports books illegal in Washington, except on tribal lands, of course.
> What I don’t understand is why there aren’t commodify parts available sans cameras

Me too. Given what I use tablets for, all other things being equal I would absolutely prefer one that didn't have a camera and microphone over one that did.