skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
you're making this way too complicated in your head. Capital gains aren't paid on an ongoing basis. Gains are only realized at the time of sale. It's literally just the difference between price at which you sell an asset and the price at which you purchased the asset.

Property taxes are paid on an ongoing basis. Property tax rates are a function of the value of the property. Tax for a property is periodically recalculated by recalculating the fair market value for the property. The fair market value is speculative; it's an essentially a statement of expectation about the market. There's no obligation that a sale be for that price. But again, that's property tax, not capital gains.

If you buy a house at fair market value in a market with absolutely no change in housing values, and the house has a crummy kitchen and then you reno the kitchen, you have a reasonable expectation that you'll sell the house at a gain. So yes, improvements "come into the calculation somehow" inasmuch as they help you sell the property at a higher price. But that's not regulated or guaranteed in any way; the gains are just what you can get someone to pay you for the property. You could do lots of work on your house and then a sinkhole opens up in the street in front of your house and you no longer have a road in front of your house and the value will go down. You could make a house -worse- and still realize a gain if there are other factors that would make people willing to pay more for it.

You can't just view the intrinsic value of the house as an object to understand its price. The price is not its intrinsic value, it's what people are willing to pay for it. The gains are how much the sale price changed over time; they're not a function of the change in the intrinsic value of the object itself.
>For the last 30 years governments and politicians have proven incapable to do anything about global heating.

you spelled corporations wrong. sorry friend, governments don't run the world.
I usually write if in such cases.

Or sometimes for multiple condition branches I use bitwise operators to create integer bit mask with couple of bits, then switch(), or array indexer, with all possible 4-8-16 values.

Your version is more error prone because contains more code than necessary. Note how it’s just “else” in original version, and manual negate statement, (cond2) && (!cond3), in your version. Easy to screw up when modifying the code at some later point. When you then need to replace cond3 with cond4, forget about second branch and the algorithm will break.
Which is terribly unfortunate, and makes me value my Canadian citizenship less and less.
> Sorry, but most vegans have serious nutrient deficiencies, like proteins, vitamin B12 or K2. Humans are meant to be omnivores, we do not have the digestive tract of herbivores to synthesize proteins or the ability to synthesize vitamin C like carnivores for that matter.

Do some research.
A million species risk extinction, are we one of them?
As humans, we are dependent on our ecosystem for e.g. food production.

So a collapse of the ecosystem will lead to challenges for humans. You can't eat bitcoin once the bees are gone.
I took mushrooms and the worst thing that happened was that I touched a bowl of mac and cheese for a while and made a small mess.
Never do I hear so many ordinary people caring about the Inuit as when I mention veganism. Really makes you think
This has been a fascinating decade or so watching the children of the 60's make their way into positions of senior governance/policymaking.
Magic mushrooms were a freely available crop of sorts when I was a student. I went picking them one day with a bunch of friends. This was enlightening.

First of all there is being outside in the countryside with a group of friends, roaming the hillside. If the pressures of assignments are getting to you this is a welcome change of scene. Particularly if there is some 'rave style' party that this expedition is in preparation for.

Next there was the challenge to one's perceptions about finding the things. Initially it looks like a hopeless task. But you find one, then you find another and soon you get to be very good at seeing the things.

From a very small age we get told that wild mushrooms are going to kill you. So how do you know that you are picking the magic ones and not the ones that will be as deadly as getting bitten by a snake?

But, you don't end up picking the wrong ones, they are all good.

Coupled with that is the other things that can get you - creepy crawlies, bugs that you can't see, that sort of stuff. Again, not a problem in reality.

There is obviously proof in the pudding, however, before getting as far as tasting some slimy mushroom brew heavily flavoured with something like Ribena you have accomplished at least three things that you can feel good about - physical exercise, having a laugh with friends and doing something that you thought was beyond you in just collecting the things.

So I think that this legalisation thing should insist on a 'trip' each time, a trip outdoors to do all of the prep. No commercialisation of the product (selling the things to people who don't do the outdoors bit). A great time can be had, and going outdoors to pick some other herbs, e.g. some rosemary or some chives, is never going to be anywhere near as fun.

Keep it recreational and spirits will be lifted. This privately - non sociable, non-recreational - partaking of the active ingredient on one's lonesome just isn't going to hit the mark in quite the same way. Might as well micro-dose alcohol at home alone (half bottle of wine with a meal, every night) if that is the approach. This is alcoholism, which contrasts with alcohol enjoyed out and about in socially engaging experiences.

I fear Denver are well meaning but going to get this wrong.
In many places in America, the only (or at least the most vocal / visible by far) vegans you'll encounter tend to be weak, unhealthy, and obnoxious about their veganism. The hypocrisy makes it hard to take a rational look at the health benefits. These are the last 4 encounters I remember myself or someone close to me having with vegans: (1) Someone who spent 2 weeks traveling with family to a country that eats mostly meat, and spent the whole trip complaining about the food and lecturing the wait staff about their local culture. (and this as an adult - they chose to join the others on the trip) (2) Guy at the gym who lectured several people in class about their protein choices, whereas he's sick every other week, very weak, and lacks the endurance that even beginners in the class quickly develop. (3) Someone who showed up to a kids birthday party and complained about the non-vegan cake. (4) Coworker who came with the team on a lunch paid for by the company. Rude to restaurant staff who clearly speak English as a second language and didn't understand the difference between vegan and vegetarian.

Now that's not meant as an insult to all vegans - I've switched to a mostly vegan diet myself. But you can almost entirely cut animal products out of your diet without needing to be a dick to people when they graciously serve you something else, or without lecturing people about health when you look like a late-stage AIDS victim. I think that puts people off. And yes, there's plenty of American meat-eaters who are equally obnoxious and close to death. But nobody wonders why people don't like them. Just more polarization because the other side's too extreme, so people go further the other way.
When traveling around Mexico, I kept wondering how it would have been like today, if we (Europeans) had behaved in a different way.
He literally invented the language, and until stepping down last year (as described in this link) he was the python BDFL (Benevolent Dictator for Life)

I apologize if this came off snarky - I did not mean for it to, I just wanted to emphasize Guido's contributions. (edited)
No, but prepaid wireless services may charge you for incoming calls.
You know what else keeps going up? The world population, from 5.2 billion in 1989 [1] to 7.7 billion today.

Yes, the PPM and global emissions charts keep going up. However, they are doing so at a much smaller rate than would be the case if governments would be doing today what they were doing in 1989.

Especially in Europe, we have see dramatic pushes towards renewable energy on the one side, and energy efficiency on the other.

A headline such as "Germany produces enough renewable energy in six months to power country's households for an entire year" [2] would have been unthinkable 30 years ago, and to claim that this is not a major development is just BS.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/renewable-energy-g...
> I should have stuck to Wordpress.

Ha - I’m exactly the opposite. I put off starting up a blog for years because I didn’t have the patience to learn some blogging “platform” like WordPress. It wasn’t until I “rolled my own” and “invented my own wheel” that it was interesting enough for me to want to focus on it. On the other hand, it’s probably a little more expensive for me to host everything myself (I could blog on Medium for free after all), but it’s interesting to work through all the technical details of things like adding a comment section, adding a captcha to that comment section, standardizing the look and feel, etc.
Coincircle Daily Competition for 500$
Daily Competition is still going on !!! Giving away $500 in $ETH every day in a crypto competition click the link and sign up now to earn $ETH every day
Sign up now:
https://coincircle.com/l/tofikwhY6J
Coincircle is a Private, decentralized cloud wallet
A decentralized cloud wallet currently supports Ethereum and all ERC-20 tokens (currently supporting nearly 3000 different tokens) and can be used across all your devices from a simple and secure web interface.
Email Could Deliver the “Internet of the Future”
Editing, testing, free hosting all done on https://repl.it (a YC company) in a HMTL, CSS, JS project
When I first read this paper I thought it was thought-provoking and captured the tension being referenced pretty well.

Over time, I've come to see it as pretty dated and misleading.

The problem is that the methods of both "cultures" are pretty black box, and it's a matter of which black you want to dress your box in. Actually, it's all black boxes anyway, all the way down, epistemological matryoshki.

The real tension is between relatively more parametric approaches, and relatively nonparametric approaches, and how much you want to assume of your data. That in turn, reduces to a bias-variance tradeoff. Some approaches are more parametric and produce less variance but more bias; others are less parametric and produce more variance but less bias. In some problem areas the parameters of the problems might push things in one or another direction; e.g., in some fields you know a lot a priori, so just slapping a huge predictive net on x and y makes no sense, but in other fields you know nothing, so it makes a lot of sense.

Another tension being conflated a bit is between prediction and measurement (supervised and unsupervised classification, forward and inverse inference, etc.). Much of what is being hyped now is essentially prediction, but a huge class of problems exist that don't really fall in this category nicely.

I disagree that computational statistics was being neglected in statistics. What I have seen is a new method (NN classes of approaches) got new life breathed into it, and became extraordinarily successful in a very specific but important class of scenarios. Subsequently, the "AI/ML" learning label got expanded to include just about any relatively nonparametric, computational statistical method. Maybe computational multivariate predictive discrimination was neglected?

A lot of what AI/ML is starting to bump up against are problems that statistics and other quantitative fields have wrestled with for decades. How generalizable are the conclusions based on this giant datasets to other data? What do you do when you have a massive model fit to a idiosyncratic set of inputs? How do you determine your model is fitting to meaningful features? What is the meaning of those features? Why this model and not another one? There are really strong answers to many of these types of questions, and they're often in traditional areas of statistics.

Anyway, I see this paper as making a sort of artificial dichotomy with regard to issues that have existed for a long long time, and see that artificial dichotomy as masking more fundamental issues that face anyone fitting any quantitative models to data. It's a misleading and maybe even harmful paper in my opinion.
Yes. It is often likened to short term memory loss too. The general idea of the activity seemed like it would be fun prior to doing it. Then after doing it when it was actually horrible, you still have the same feeling about its potential fun that you had in the beginning, but you fail to modify it with the pain of the actual experience - as if you forgot already.
> What was the last application you worked in where that single line is all you had to understand to accomplish whatever task you were working on?

Exactly.

The bigger constructs expressed in functions, classes, etc, are where the attention should really be.

The smaller ideas expressed in single lines of code are, should be, insignificant in terms of cognitive load.

There are some exceptions to this, in particular very high performant code. We all know that "premature optimization...".
Golang doesn't have enums
The first "attribute" is simply an HTTP header. As such it can be selected and changed by the user. The user may choose not to send a User-Agent header at all. IME, few sites actually require a User-Agent header in order to retrieve a page. Developers sometimes try to vary page content based on this header. For example, send a certain string containing the name of a "bot" and you might get nothing. The detection occurs before any content is returned.

The rest of these "attributes" are not HTTP headers, and occurs after the resource is fetched. We do not need to give away this information in order to retrieve the resource. The fingerprinting problem arises because the software we use to do the retrieval does far more than retrieve web pages. These other attributes cannot be detected unless the software used to retrieve the web page also includes other features that process what is retrieved, including a Javascript engine that runs code straight from the internet ("browser").

Looking to the authors of a popular browser to solve the problem they themselves have created. Is it rational to expect that this is where the solution will come from?

If one is willing to make some "useability tradeoffs" then one might use a simple http client to retrieve web pages instead of a popular browser. After the pages are retrieved, then one can use a popular browser to view them if desired; the browser need not have access to the internet. This is what I do. Not to avoid "fingerprinting" but just because it is faster and more robust.

With the help of a trivial program that transforms urls into http (I wrote one), one can retrieve the text/html of web pages, without requesting all the third party advertising cruft, with any tcp client such as netcat. HTTP pipelining becomes easy, making consumption of large quantities of information more efficient -- many pages, one connection. The two programs together form an "http client" with, relative to a popular browser, or even a program like curl, very low code complexity.

Whenever I see the "fingerprinting" debate come up, I always go through the same thought experiment: For situations where "fingerprinting" is a problem, web users all use the same simple http client. All send the same minimal headers. The web must accomodate users not the other way around.
> Sorry, but most vegans have serious nutrient deficiencies, like proteins, vitamin B12 or K2. Humans are meant to be omnivores

Hi, I went to high school too.

Unfortunately for you this isn't true. Humans are quite capable to adapt to a meatless diet and remain healthy. You don't need the levels of protein suggested by many government adopted food guides or athletic trainers. We actually consume far more protein than is necessary for the average person.

I haven't eaten meat in years. I run 5k twice a week, cycle everywhere when the weather is good, and my doctor says I'm in good health. It's definitely possible to be healthy and not eat meat.

There are exceptions! I have friends who are allergic to complex plant-based proteins. There are people from ethnic and cultural groups who are also not able to switch to an entirely plant-based diet. That's fine! There will always be exceptions.

However the majority of us are able to reduce our meat consumption and given the current climate and indications of where it's heading I think it's great that this is finally coming to light.

> If you want policy, ask the lawmakers to stop subsidizing corn and wheat.

As far as I know, in my limited knowledge of the matter, a large part of the produce from those subsidies goes to feeding cattle. The backtracking of the Brazilian rain forest seems to be in large due to soy crops to feed cattle. (It appeared as though the campaigning to save the rain forest in the 90's was working until about the mid-aughts when it started to revert... fast).

The majority of crops are going to feed the meat industry to feed an even smaller population of humans. If enough of the human population adapted to a plant based diet we wouldn't even need most of those crops.

I used to hold the, "humans are omnivores," opinion but.. it was just an opinion. There have been some eye-opening documentaries in recent years shedding light on the data and political forces used to ensure the survival and growth of the meat industry. That's what tipped me over... being lied to that meat was such a critical part of my health when it's not... and that such campaigning has been harming the environment and hurting the climate -- something that does affect me more than missing bacon. I can live without bacon if it means my kids and their kids have a chance at making it through the next 100 years of damage coming their way.
"You don't get more than you pay for" is typically true.

"You get what you pay for" is far from guaranteed.
GitHub is owned by Microsoft though, so there's no guarantee they won't have problems with someone else doing this.
> What's to stop someone else backporting security patches and necessary fixes as needed ad infinitum?

Nothing, it may even prove to be a business model, and vendors like Red Hat may be forced to do that anyway.

But back-porting security fixes to core Python 2.7 is one thing, but for many 3rd party libraries? Especially if they're GPL'd? That would take a coordinated effort, which again might happen, but hasn't materialized yet. So betting on that seems risky at the moment.

Python 2.7 EOL has been public knowledge for quite a while (and even pushed out once before). True, it is very convenient to forget about, and hope somebody else will sort out your tech debt.
If you're entirely within Illustrator, you're probably better off using Adobe's javascript API. Better cross-platform, better language, faster (less process switching overhead).

It has pretty good AppleScript coverage (from looking at the dictionary) but I've never used most of it.

Mostly used AppleScript to call 'do javascript'.
Fresh magic mushrooms have been effectively legal in nearby New Mexico for 14 years, since a 2005 Court of Appeals ruling. This doesn't seem to have caused an appreciable rise in magic mushroom drug culture, or problems with abuse. I would expect the same result in Denver: pretty much nothing.

Weird how taking that same fresh mushroom and sticking it in a dehydrator converts it into a felony to posses.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/apmush06-15-05.htm
Its perfectly normal for hunter and prey populations to oscillate. The hunters hunt a lot of prey, multiply, overhunt, prey population goes down, many hunters starve, prey population recovers and the cycle repeats. You see that a lot in animals, and humans are not immune to this. But as a species we might have overdone it, and nobody wants to see the crash as the ecosystems we rely on collapse.

It won't be the end of the planet (whatever that even means), it won't be the end of life on earth's surface, it likely won't even be the end of humanity. But it might mean a lot of human death and suffering that could be avoided.
Social media gives unfair advantage to a horde of ankle biters, influences and opinionated individuals to affect things that matter.

Even completely harmful promotion can snowball into supporting harmful behaviour. CTO or senior developer in a small company may feel the need to promote stuff they do by writing technical articles and commenting ongoing debates in the social media. Attaching comments to anything that is trending is important if you want to promote stuff. Suddenly the person is committed with his own name to something he did not thing trough and unintentionally adding side support to some hate campaign.
We could do this all day, but the fundamental difference here is you look at the normal functioning of capitalism and think it is just and good, while I look at it and see it as highly exploitative, unethical and inhumane. I think concentration of wealth and power in the hands of an unelected few is bad, and I think the world that these people have created is also bad. I think that we as a species can, and must do better.
If abuse was possible perhaps we’d have the cartels selling magic mushrooms - if that’s not a thing maybe (as Pollan concluded in his book about psychedelics) “place and setting make a big difference “ in efficacy.
the := PEP stunk badly of cargo cult programming, you see knee-jerk proposals like that every time a blog makes the rounds and Guido deserved the pushback
How to Unlock the Power of Your Brain and Become a Top Student
Since you want to be technical, we should say that the changes to the value of capital items get charged to the income statement (profit & loss). Capital items only get depreciated if they are wasting, and could indeed be revalued upwards. It is quite common for real property, for instance) to not get depreciated and be held at historical cost, or indeed to be revalued annually.
Nope, you just have reached the point that others haven't yet.

Your carbon footprint is much lower than theirs for sure and trying to convince someone with a higher footprint to change will be vastly more efficient than trying to squeeze the last kilogram of carbon emission reduction out of your own life.

Thanks for the effort by the way!
Weissman Score
One crypto exchange can still move a coin's price more than its fundamentals
Definitely true. There are also instances of companies charging premium prices for lower quality products in many hobbyist communities. I'd say the clear corollary to "you get what you pay for" is caveat emptor "buyer beware".

As an aside, I know it's typically discouraged from commenting about downvotes, but within minutes my comment in the thread was heavily downvoted and I don't understand why?
Step 1. Do not embalm the body.
Step 2. Do not put it in a coffin.
Step 3. Bury it.

Overcoming the marketing pressure of the morticians and funerals industry is the non-trivial part. It's like getting engaged without a diamond ring. All you have to do is not buy an expensive thing that nobody needs.
My confusion stems from the fact that I don't know why people are lacing drugs with fentanyl. It's unclear to me because most of the stuff I see written about fentanyl talks about it like it's a poison that kills people -- why not add arsenic instead, which also kills people? As I understand it drug dealers rely on repeat business, and it seems like bad business to sell tainted goods.