skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You won’t get where you are going faster just because a lane has no speed limit. There’s a reason the other lanes are moving at 5mph or less.

Congestion isn’t about what happens on straight stretches of road, it’s about what happens at exits and junctions. I mean sure, you get “standing waves” is traffic caused by people changing lanes or braking suddenly, but when an exit lane is full because the traffic ahead is held up by a red light or a busy stop/yield intersection, no speed limit is going to help.

What will help is fewer (yes, fewer) lanes on the main road, more lanes (or “holding space”) at intersections, and mechanisms for allowing exiting traffic to enter side roads without using intersections.
I guess you should keep your kids locked in your house as well, since the outside is full of strangers that could look at them in the streets. And the only thing worse than someone looking at photos or videos of your kids is seeing your kids live, because they exist, are visible, and people have eyes.

I think the solution is to create a new kid of clothing, that covers the kid wholly, no inch of skin to be shown, that is put whenever the kid needs to be seen in public, to end this terrible invasion of the kid's privacy whenever anyone takes a look at them outside.
Yep the SPU you end up spending so much time managing memory.

No cache they are just dumb processors. I find it funny they thought they can take ps2 vu0/vu1 and make it a processor.
This $2000 is not an answer, it's a new category of its own.

The S10 line is the (great, IMHO) "answer" to the other flagships. And Samsung phones typically get cheaper after a couple months.
The future (of folding screens) is here, and it's gaudy.
Thomas would quite happily overturn this line of reasoning just to get the government back to the business of just enforcing contracts. I'm sure he'd be happy to let workers sign themselves into slavery again. Daniel Webster must be applauding from his grave.
That is not correct. He purchased it with the proceeds of his father's life insurance policy.
Agreed, but I wish they had designed it to fold along the other axis. This thing looks weirdly thin and elongated when folded, and seems to have a lot of wasted real estate above (and maybe below) the external screen. Folding in the other direction would be much more natural. It would just look like a smaller, thicker tablet.
Everyone deserves due process.
And if you accidentally break a law because some countries did more than the directive?
Ouch. It would seem his choices woudld be either open source with a strong hand and commercial variant (a la Rails/Ruby Sidekiq) or open source and one lets it be free.
Unfortunately the problem with the kind of niches you're talking about there is that the buyers of the software rarely have to actually use it which leads to the terrible situations of the users.
That's because, by and large, it also takes considerable respect in practice to become a President or Senator (sure, you can find a few exceptions, but you can for the Supreme Court, too, and there have been a lot fewer Supreme Court justices than Senators and Presidents combined.)
You can hire firefighters, I would rather hire people who know how to build a house that doesn't burn down.
An eleven year old shouldn't be uploading content to YouTube. An eleven year old doesn't understand the second or third order consequences of their actions when they upload a video of themselves, along with their friends, trying on bikinis in their bedrooms.

If you're under 16, your content, and the uploading of it, should be supervised. Why are we letting our children run free on the Internet? You wouldn't let them run free on a highway and the Internet is just as dangerous but in different ways.

I believe YouTube need to implement a system of age verification for content creators. 16+ minimum if you ask me. If the parents do the uploading, whelp, you found your issue (if any arise)
thanks for this :)
> Youtube wants to cater to everyone but to me it is clear Youtube is a risky place for a child.

The Internet, in general, is a "risky" place for a child, always has been and always will be.
But trying to "child-proof" this whole thing will just completely destroy what little remains of its original idea.
Doesn't YouTube by now have curated categories with specific themes? Imho it shouldn't be that difficult for them to offer something like that.

And yes, YouTube is full of weird semi-soft-core content, which I consider quite amusing and innocent in its own way. It's kind of cute to think there are so many users on there who seem to be completely incapable of finding actual porn on the Internet, and instead need to use YouTube as the digital equivalent of a Gloria's Secret underwear catalog.
They'd probably have to get rid of playlists too. Like the other comment said, a lot of these are just innocent videos, many of which kids make themselves. Either that or they're videos from sports games or dance competitions.

The videos themselves are pretty normal. It's the context that the playlists place them in that's at issue.
There are tiny communities who use recreational Latin today. Here's the Vicipaedia article on the telephonum: https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephonum

But that doesn't really constitute a good argument that there is a Latin word for telephones.
I'm not much of a money guy to be honest but isn't profit what dictates how much you can invest on the product?

If you have a constant user base that provides constant profit why is growth needed to sustain a business?
To be clear: Modern English and Scots share the same direct ancestor of Middle English. They’re both about the same age, they both diverged from Middle English.

The Romans made it all the way to Aberdeen, the Normans got up north no problem and did pretty well e.g. the De Brus family of Annandale neé Normany.
The state did prove that Timbs and committed the crime he was being fined for, the question at hand is whether the state can take away his car.

One reason might have been if it was the proceeds of drug-dealing. But that reason is not relevant since he could prove otherwise (let alone whether the burden of proof is/should be on him).

The other reason is simpler: States can fine people for stuff, but (according to the USSC) the fine can't be excessive.
As a guess, the MEPs are divided proportionally to parties based on the vote total of the entire country. Rather than say, splitting the country up into chunks and having each chunk selecting an MEP.
> you are publishing your video to the public when you upload the file

Due to various cognitive biases most people fail to realize just how big and far reaching that public is.

To share an example from my own experience a few years ago. I wrote a blogpost. I love writing blogs and sharing them with The Public. That's why I write it.

In one of them I used an Xkcd comic. My entire audience, anyone I could ever imagine reading it, knows XKCD and loved it.

But then that blog got 100,000 views. Then 200,000. Then it spiraled. Suddenly I was flamed from all sides, called a disgusting human being and all sorts of things. Why? Because I didn't correctly attribute that XKCD comic.

"Yay my friends and their friends and liek 1000 people saw my thing" is a completely different "public" than when THE public sees your thing. Most people imagine the former when they think "Oh I'm uploading this and it's going to be public"
"To me, this indicates that much of the current ML research fails to generate true insight."

I don't think anyone who knows what they're talking about would say otherwise.
Show HN: Cross Platform Encryption with AES Between Swift and Node.js
Internet brings this to a massive, billion+ sized audience, though. Say the rate of pedophilia is 1 in a million (I just made that number up). That means there are, on average, 0 creeps watching your kids at gymnastics meets and pools in real life. However, upload as a public video to youtube, and like flies to honey, hundreds of creeps will gravitate toward the video.
> The artist Marina Abramović has said that the moment we begin to believe in our own greatness, that we kill our ability to be truly creative

That's the spirit cooking lady, right?
That's because the duds are filtered through time and forgetfulness. Rose tinted glasses of memory.

Nobody remembers the boring movies from their childhood.
> Thankfully, blind allegations with no substantiation aren't enough to ruin a whole careers worth of earned respect.

And apparently, neither is lying during your sworn testimony to Congress.
Yep, just like your home locks are not rated as "breakable/unbreakable", but "how many minutes to break". Most locks are below 5 minutes.

Locks requiring more than 30 minutes are considered pretty much unbreakable (easier to break through the nearest wall).
*alleged
That’s not how it works. The 9 MEPs in my constituency all represent me despite me not voting for any of them.

However like in FPTP they are representitives, they aren’t delegates.
Shameless plug, there is also GraphComment — https://graphcomment.com/en/ — with similar features, and some different ones too. We respect privacy and don’t sell user data.

Disclaimer: I work for this company, as you might have already guessed.
Amazing. Nestle, who kills babies, and Disney, which is itself in the "softcore child porn" market, acting as though their corporate morals have been compromised by advertising on YouTube because of creepy/criminal commenters.
Don’t use YouTube. Photos on Mac and iOS make sharing family videos dead simple. Not sure why anyone uses YouTube to share videos they don’t want to be public.
> it was very much at the center of the mathematical world in the early decades of the 20th century

Ok, but those pre-Gödel mathematicians were profoundly mistaken about the nature of mathematics. To put it bluntly: they were wrong, so why should I care what they thought?

> It does not seek to mathematically derive theorems from mathematical axioms, but to derive mathematical axioms from philosophical underpinnings

I don't agree. If you don't add new axioms, then you are 'merely' deriving theorems. If you do add new axioms, fine, you're just adopting a new set of axioms to explore through derivation.

If some set of axioms gives rise to interesting mathematical consequences, does that mean these axioms must have philosophical underpinnings? No. Does the 'validity' of the mathematics depend on the philosophical underpinnings of the axioms? No: it counts as mathematics either way.

It would be pure silliness to dismiss non-Euclidean geometry on the grounds that Hey, you just made that up!

Perhaps there's a gap somewhere in my account of things, but I'm not seeing one so far.

> to derive mathematical axioms from philosophical underpinnings -- whether they are physical reality, some Platonic reality, or even common sense

Which of these underpins non-Euclidean geometry? How about fields with no practical applications? How about, as I've mentioned several times, research into what happens when you deny the axiom of choice?

They're all still valid fields of mathematics. The 'underpinnings' of the chosen axioms are of no consequence: it's valid mathematics either way.

The miracle is that we're able to be so successful with fields like physics and statistics. Picking the right special sets of axioms, we've been able to derive huge amounts.

> the SEP link I provided above is a great place to start

Looks it - will read when I get a moment.
This argument doesn't even fly. In the case that the owner is unknown you could simply file a suit against John Doe, Unidentified Owner of Big Pile Of Cash.
Not one of the judges on the SC questions their place the correctness of the process

They do this all the time...in nearly every decision...It's literally their job to question the correctness of the judicial process...
Did he actually write that piece of the commercial? Or any Apple commercial becomes a Steve Jobs quote.
I don't think a lot of parents are. It's more of people ripping (sometimes unlisted) family videos and posting them on accounts with large collections.

The videos themselves aren't really the issue. It's the context they're presented in.
Sparta: High-Performance Static Code Analyzers Based on Abstract Interpretation
> I’m sitting in front of a 2017 MBP that has been used as a stationary desktop and babied with a keyboard cover and much TLC that has strange screen artifacts that seem to indicate that it was pinched

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203671
its down. But what does it have over https://panopticlick.eff.org/ ?
Unions operate according to the rules the union members agree to. There is no "one way" that unions function. A "programmer's union" would be structured according to whatever makes sense to the programmers.
I think for any FDE, including FileVault, the disk encryption helps but there are many more potential avenues for attack if the system was not off when stolen. Those avenues include remote exploits on anything listening for incoming network traffic on the Mac and DMA attacks through Thunderbolt. I don't know what the current status is of exploits through physical ports on a Mac but they have existed in the past.

It's not just Mac users, I mentioned this issue in a meeting with an Apple sales engineer last month and he acted like you don't need to turn off a Mac to make it safer (he's not a security engineer so I don't really expect him to know how un/safe a running system with FileVault is). It may well be that the current OS and/or T2 chip makes it very, very hard to access the boot volume of a running Mac without a user's login but there's still a network exploit risk.
I love CLEP. I did it a long time ago, no prep just walked in and knocked out 12 semester hours. I was a freshman, would have scored 18 hours but I had already taken calculus.

You can easily get out of your first year. Cost now is about $85 a class. But you need to check that your targeted university accepts the CLEP.

Western Governors is an interesting choice to consider.
A single constituency, that represent everyone in the Netherlands regardless if they were eligible to vote, let alone if they voted for X
This sounds so insane to me:
"In fiscal year 2018, state and local agencies received $400 million through this arrangement, known as equitable sharing. The amount varied widely by agency — the Surprise Police Department in Arizona received $570,000, while the Buffalo Police Department in upstate New York got $130,000. The New York Police Department took in $7.8 million.

In Philadelphia, forfeiture proceeds once accounted for 20 percent of prosecutors’ budget, while agencies in New York and California tended to take in the highest sums, according to the Institute for Justice."
Early products using cutting edge tech probably often seem gimmicky, but I think it would be short sided to dismiss the whole concept due to that.

Hopefully enough early adopters buy this thing so that they keep iterating and improving on these. It's easy to see how a phone with a folding screen would be desirable to a lot of people... if it were thinner and cheaper. The first foldable phone is probably not going to be a great product, maybe not even the first 10 of them. In 5 years maybe they'll be great though.
...and one cable internet provider at nearly any given location.
"So you say your father broke your arm.... This isn't a bone fracture! It's bad parenting, now go home, no medical attention for you"

So your father broke your arm at age ten. And broke your arm annually every year thereafter because he's an abusive asshat. And doctors decided to label you with some bizarre form of osteoporosis that must be the underlying cause of your frequent and mysterious fractures. And when you finally smack dad in the head with a hammer as an adult in self defense, it goes in your file that you are not only crazy but also dangerous and violent, even though you've never been violent with anyone else ever.

Better solution: You need a restraining order on your father who should not see you without court supervision while he finishes up his jail sentence for assault and battery and child abuse. He goes to therapy. You get put in a safe environment with adults who don't break your arm annually while claiming it's you that's defective.
Simpler than trying to craft a regulation that would be compatible with:

- Common law systems and civil law systems,

- with or without constitutions,

- in republics, federations, monarchies and principalties

- speaking 20-odd official languages.
Assuming you mean because of the Brexit vote, then you either mean 38% or 66%.

Turnout was only 72%. So if you've got a beef with Brexit voters that's 52*0.72 =~ 38%, or maybe you also resent those who didn't bother to vote at all, which combined with Brexit voters raises it to around 66%.

That's before attempting to adjust for voters who've died since the vote, and those voting age citizens who couldn't legally vote in 2016.
That's roughly what they did, though they also said "hey, we're the Supreme Court of this state, and we're not just going to give it to them." Here is the money shot from the Indiana Supreme Court opinion:

> A second option is to await guidance from the Supreme Court and decline to find or assume incorporation until the Supreme Court decides the issue authoritatively. We choose this latter, more cautious approach for two reasons. First, although the Supreme Court has addressed this issue only in dicta, its statement in McDonald that the Clause has not been incorporated is entitled to more weight because it is the Court’s most recent. Second, Indiana is a sovereign state within our federal system, and we elect not to impose federal obligations on the State that the federal government itself has not mandated. An important corollary is that Indiana has its own system of legal, including constitutional, protections for its citizens and other persons within its jurisdiction. Absent a definitive holding from the Supreme Court, we decline to subject Indiana to a federal test that may operate to impede development of our own excessive-fines jurisprudence under the Indiana Constitution.
But it doesn't say if it protects from house flies :/
It’s just that you don’t agree with it.

There is a big chiasm between censored internet (Facebook, newspapers) where everything is polished but only reflects 25% of the population, and free internet (the rest) where you get an actual image of diversity. It’s just that you don’t like this diversity and you want them not to exist, but their points are, if not correct, at least vastly unadressed because the visible society despises them.

I defend men’s rights. All of MR forums are underground. They’re not happy, they’re unadressed and despised by society. And that’s 49% of population. Saying men’s rights are a non-issue which should not be adressed and deserves the censorship it has in the above-ground internet is, by nature, discriminatory towards men. It’s just an example, but you won’t be able to keep the pressure cooker very long.
Large countries are split into chunks - the UK comprises about 9 constituencies IIRC.
ceci n'est pas une cat
It's not the same, but I'm reminded of the Habitat Chronicles [1]:

"I found myself unable to reconcile the idea of a virtual world, where kids would run around, play with objects, and chat with each other without someone saying or doing something that might upset another. Even in 1996, we knew that text-filters are no good at solving this kind of problem, so I asked for a clarification: 'I’m confused. What standard should we use to decide if a message would be a problem for Disney?'

"The response was one I will never forget: 'Disney’s standard is quite clear: No kid will be harassed, even if they don’t know they are being harassed.'"

So now it's 2019, and here we are. I guess the filters have gotten better. We certainly expect a lot more from them.

[1] http://habitatchronicles.com/2007/03/the-untold-history-of-t...
It's just physics, not a moral argument. Drag increases as a function of velocity squared, and increasing speeds above some point requires more energy per mile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_equation

If there isn't a lot of traffic on a section of road, people can move through that section faster at higher speeds, so there can be less congestion.

On the other hand, if there is enough traffic, high speeds reduce the throughput of a given section of road because braking distances as a function of speed increase faster than speed.

https://one.nhtsa.gov/nhtsa/Safety1nNum3ers/august2015/S1N_S...
There was a book called 'Dont get taken every time' Written by a former car salesman. It is a fun read, as well as informative. Easily pays for itself on your next purchase.
Been begging them to make a function that is "Date Cell was updated on."
I personally think you're missing the point of the article.

The content of your videos (based on the example you gave) are harmless. Adorable, in fact. You have a beautiful daughter - congrats. Sadly you're missing the point that you did the uploading, not her.

The article is about children, I'd say around 11-14 in age on average, possibly late teens too, uploading videos of themselves... themselves. And the videos are adorable videos of them down the park in jeans, they're videos of them in bikinis in their bedrooms. Some of them are videos of them sucking on lollipops... I mean really?

Also, the videos being uploading are flags. They're used to signal to pedophiles: there's other content available outside of this video. They're guiding lights for people who wanted darker content.

Your videos are just your videos, and you moderate them. It's not the same thing at all.
Everything you said is true except I can't see how fish helps in this case. You still need to eat a lot of fish (especially since most fish are very low fat, salmon is a good choice) and cut Omega 6 sources, if you want to make Omega 3:Omega 6 ratio 2:1.
As far as underwear goes, no I wouldn't care if I was under age 3 in the photo. Seeing a kid in a diaper is an everyday public thing. In that case, she was in a diaper rather than a bathing suit because she was still diaper age. I don't see it remotely as something to be embarrassed about.

I don't "need" to post publicly but I also have no reason not to. I'm not going to let people having creepy thoughts control my life, unless there is an actual, tangible danger of harm.

Honestly, if I was worried about creeps, I wouldn't let her wear a skirt in public. I see other girls at the playground all the time that make me wince a bit...I'm far more likely to dress my daughter in pants. But at the end of the day, I'm 1000 times more concerned about people in real life than on YouTube....because they are right there.
Lyft Reportedly Plans to Debut on Nasdaq Next Month
I have looked into this before and one thing I noticed is that the videos with the creepiest comments tend to be reposts. The videos that actually belong to the kids and families who posted them often have their comments disabled. Perhaps YouTube could do more to delete the reposted videos attracting so much perverted attention.
> don't create crappy products

Exactly, just don't write bugs.

The same way Michelangelo sculpted David, he just removed the marble not part of the statue.
Really seems ridiculous.....