skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why not fine them instead?

Before you say, not everyone can afford XYZ fine. I would fully support a income based proportional fine system in the US.

What i Don't support is putting someone in jail because they can't afford a lawyer.
Considering the time when it was written, it could mean for example Java's ridiculously long generic declarations which couldn't be inferred or aliased.

Things are much better and more ergonomic these days.

Specific example - some languages will allow you to do:

fun f(x: int): // return type inferred
var foo = something(x)
return foo

While others need (including type erasure getting in the way):

Complete<Version<Of<Generic, Foo>>>> f(int x) {
Complete<Version<Of<Generic, Foo>>>> foo = (Complete<Version<Of<Generic, Foo>>>>) something(x);
return foo;
}
It's generally the case that a significant chance of being caught is a much bigger deterrent than a significant punishment if you are caught.

https://nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx
Because that American company would be held to American laws, and if the point of the South American company was to skirt American laws, that isn't going to work.
You want to have the time of your life when you're young and healthy to enjoy it! All the money in the world can't turn back the clock. Of course there is an in-between way: delay that trip for a year and save money for it. But that's HARD.
That $22000 amounts to good wages for everyone involved, though. A lot of people eating off the taxpayer for that one arrest, so less incentive to "fix" the problem. It's only a problem to the taxpayer, and to the taxpayer, it's worth it to stick it to that guy who jumped the fare even if it costs tons of money because it's unfair ( I paid, you didn't ). This is pretty fundamental human psychology.
So for #1 and #2, you just hand-wave your doctrine as "miracles" that defy all otherwise known and consistent laws of the universe. Doesn't seem like intellectual integrity to me.

And #3 and #4 are directly at odds. You say Priests are not allowed to have children, which is why they are celibate (fair enough) but we all know children can't be born without both a Father and Mother involved. So when men choose not to have children for the priesthood, it's seen as noble. But Women aren't given that same choice in your view (Except they are, because nuns exist, yet Nuns cannot ever actually lead the Church).

Why don't you admit that the reason the Catholic church does not allow women priests is not because "a women's function is laborious" (a function not all women naturally can even do, otherwise why can't barren women be priests?), but rather because you take the words of Paul literally and do not allow a woman to hold authority over a man? That's the real reason and you know it.

Also, the "faith alone" thing is a bit misunderstood to be honest, mostly caused by how protestants overload that word. They basically mean that you cannot be saved by works alone under any circumstance, and that if you are unable to produce any works but have faith, you can still be saved (the example here is the penitent thief on the cross). After that, they consider works to be a natural outcome of legitimate faith, and that if you have the chance to do works and don't you'll lose your justification by faith.

There's a sermon by Wesley on that here: http://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/the-sermons-of-john-wesley...
Oh man, CDS/CDC (Control Data Systems/ Control Data Corporation) is where my Dad worked. Don't know if you knew him (Ed), but he was one of the last 2-4 employees for the company. He was working up in Michigan until 1996. I still remember we took a vacation to DC and in the Smithsonian they had 2 of the machines he worked on. [Him swearing at some hardware while in a museum because it had cut him is one of my best memories. Asked him how he could tell and it had a screwdriver ding from shutting it).
> A similar case can be made for Chinese companies, many of whom are actively complicit in human rights violations

Snowden showed us that US companies routinely do this, with FISA forcing them to participate just like the Chinese Govt does to Chinese companies. Also, US law only protects the human rights of US citizens, while non-citizens get their privacy invaded routinely (in contravention of Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
They're not public by "mistake". They're public because someone was lazy, wanted to share something and didn't want to bother with authentication. They knew they were making it public but figured no one would find it except the desired recipient so why put in the effort to make a better solution.
Using encryption to hide from a repressive regime may just make you a target.
Well, if you go iPad, $400 but point taken.
Maybe. I think if someone visits just to troll having to donate to a publication they dislike might be a reasonable deterrent and it improves user tracking for moderation. It could serve to focus the conversation to people who at least respect the publication as a whole even if they disagree with a particular article. Seeing comments by people who clearly just dislike the Guardian don't really add much. Comments like "Typical left wing Guardian nonsense" are pretty common and useless.
But it didn't cost $22,000. If he didn't go to a jail would the city save $22k?

The city lost $215,000,000 in revenue due to the fare evasion.
Crime in NYC did drop precipitously, but it's not clear that broken windows policing was the cause. It's been studied and debated a lot, but as far as I can tell there isn't a clear consensus. Here are some sources:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory#New_York...
* https://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/13/why-did-crime-...
Do they not charge for network costs anyway?

A more optimistic view is that this allows them to provide a better service.
COBRA these days ends up being way too expensive for most people to afford. Perhaps at one time it was a useful regulation. Now it is pretty unaffordable.
Is this a joke? Guardian is one of the most biased far-left papers in existence. They report falsehoods all the time. One off the top of my head is how they were claiming that high frequency trading was bad for mom and pops. I'm a finance person, so this individual article stuck out to me.
That "something" is the huge, relatively homogeneous, english-speaking and thus very "international-by-default" single market.

It's the one and only actual moat that the US has over Europe when it comes to developing huge corporations in the winner-takes-all online markets. Everything else (like better VC situation, more attractive environment for international talent) is just a result of this original moat and would have just as well developed the other way round if this one advantage had been on the other side of the Atlantic.
Can someone explain it to me, why in SF its treated as a minor ticket similar to overdue parking meters as apposed to NYC where people are jailed for not having a valid ticket ?
Never thought NYC could be soo ridiculous.
Does the "you are no longer logged in" screen not infuriate anyone besides me? There doesn't seem any purpose to it just redirecting you to the landing page when you were trying to access a forum post that doesn't even require you be logged in.

Absolutely mind boggling with as much as they pay people they do something so stupid and haven't changed it after so long.
“Hey everybody, I like crust punk, look at me” - the post.
If you want to imagine we are all born with a 'debt' then you should also assume we are born with an 'asset'. They should be workign to put that on paper faster than the debt.

As a personal choice, I don't accept any excuse for taking on debt to fund a lifestyle. It is just not a good idea.

I've talked to people who come up with these crazy justifications in their 20s why spending money now is more important than spending money later; I don't know why it is so hard to accept that these decisions have a 20 year time horizons and that they are going to live to be 75. The averages are pretty clear, if you prioritise financial security above incidental expenses you can have both.

Expensive experiences are not worth more than financial security, they don't meaningfully contribute to people's lives or happiness. You can be just as happy playing sports with locals to meet new people as traveling to exotic locations to gawp at nice architecture and meet new people. In 10 years you won't notice if you cooked your own food or had someone else do it for you. An expensive car will not bring a normal person good luck. You can live in a couple of different houses over a lifetime and save much money with little downside.

The pleasure of a purchase is not an urgent need.
I know a couple spiritual scientists, but they all critically adopt practices based on their personal philosophy... so I don't consider them to be "religious".

Religion requires dogma and worship, surrendering free will in the extreme. Those spiritual scientists fall in the same ballpark as agnostics/atheists (myself) that learned some life lessons from Marvel comics, Miyazaki animation, and other modern myths.
I wasn't aware of that! My apologies. Thank you for the info.
That sounds reasonable. I agree that overflow is often a bug (and in GCC can use -ftrapv to enforce that view). But overflow is also frequently what you want in algorithms that deal with counters or differences of sums. Maybe point out that there are well-defined operators available in Zig as well?

I'm not immediately seeing how non-wrapping arithmetic can enable significant optimisation. What could be faster than an integer add? If you have an example, I would be very interested (the classic "infinite loop" example is not particularly meaningful in my view).

I always assumed that C left this undefined mostly to support non-two's complement machines, which should probably not be a concern anymore. That's the only explanation I can come up with that explains why unsigned arithmetic is well-defined, but not signed arithmetic.
Because it's usually fined $100, that means something else is going on.
We should just make the subway free. $2.75 doesn't come close to covering the cost of the ride, so why add a regressive tax on what amounts to a basic need?
Good point, we have no idea how many private repos have been compromised and I assume people won't come forward either.

The messed up part is that the repos are probably worth waaaay more than the ransom, especially if the companies are making money.

I wonder how many security people will be walking out the door TBH.
> When ammunition capacity is reduced, there is an incentive to go for a (typically) more reliable revolver.

In case anyone isn't reading between the lines:

The chief advantage of a more complicated, less reliable, more expensive semi-auto handgun is its larger capacity in a smaller profile. A semi-auto packs rounds tightly together rather than having an effective chamber around each one.

But if you don't actually get more rounds, might as well opt for a revolver like the parent.
تحميل فيس بوك لايت للايفون برابط مباشر اخر تحديث Facebook Lite iOS
Neither of those points is an excuse for breaking the law unless you're mentally ill. In which case you should still be locked up but this time in a mental institution.

Just pay for your ticket or walk.
Really? My takeaway from the article was to never, ever get into a 737 MAX plane, regardless of what hack they manage get approved. And that their quality control has gone completely secondary to profits.

I don't see why Boeing would pay to have this published.
I am approaching 1.5 decades as an employed software engineer. Interviewing culture seems to change a little over the years, but usually in other wacky directions that leave me feeling entirely disengaged from the industry. I also very much love my vocation, though it alone is not enough to keep me enduring through the insanity of technical interviews , "cultural fit" assessments, and the violence of linear reductionism.

Articles and discussion threads like this are pretty much the only reason Im willing to interview at all (and thus remain in the industry). So thanks for sharing, Im glad to know other people are aware of how bonkers this is.

The long version takes years of explaining.

The short version is: I am highly allergic to cognitive dissonance.
I have mixed feelings about PlusCal. I, too, prefer TLA+ (except for low-level concurrent algorithms, or maybe algorithms best specified with long series of sequential steps), but for many programmers PlusCal can feel more familiar (which may be misleading; specification is not programming, and when you specify in TLA+ it also looks different from programming, but PlusCal looks a lot like programming, but it isn't). I think that those who are not threatened by mathematical notation should start with TLA+, and those who are should start with PlusCal. But there is value in the examples of specifications of the book regardless of the notation used. The central principles of specification are always the same.
Going to jail for not paying a subway ticket is just ... unbelievable. A 100$ fine should have done it. And if the person is not paying the fine, there are laws for that too... eventually you may be, perhaps, go to jail.
It most certainly does not amount to good wages for the person who is in jail for not paying a $2.75 fare. Their 60 days in jail will have long-lasting implications on their livelihood for the rest of their life. There are grave "collateral consequences" we must consider. (Read https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2512920 for more on what this looks like.)
https://quillette.com
Rather, it entrenches the power to the bland, indistinct body of politics as a whole, which expresses itself through numerous voting choices that are hard to distinguish from one another and are more less the same ideology, which can get large numbers of votes through choices that are only ostensibly distinct. It suppresses votes for choices that stand out from that group.

I don't think that is even necessary because the current voting systems already eliminate the fringes. For instance in many countries there is effectively a persistent two- or three-party system, even though other parties make an appearance.
That assumes people would pay the money otherwise. Which is almost certainly not true.

The people who don’t pay likely don’t have the money in the first place or are drunk. It’s unlikely they would have paid any ways.
Tooling in this case replaces a lot of boiler plate unit tests. The stronger and more rigorous the typing the fewer ad hoc tests that need to be hand written. I think the cost is the tooling becomes more finicky about what you feed it.

C weakly typed -> compile -> run-> crash -> WTF?!!!

Rust strongly typed -> WTF? Why no compile!!
For me it would add stress. I would feel I had to be productive to earn it.

Of course, if it's not meant to be fun-time stuff, then it would be great.
I don't get how they'd be headaches for employees? HRA contributions are 100% tax-free and aren't treated as income. It's a pain for my co-founder and I, or would be, if we didn't have someone else doing our taxes.
Anyone have a non pay walled version?
You literally don't, unless you had control of the "starting point" being your birth. One cannot make an action of their own without the influence of the external forces upon oneself. This isn't a bad thing, it's just reality and even studying this brings awareness to how God cannot even have own will. Once again that's not a bad thing.
Or do they tell themselves that the child they can’t afford would have been bad for the environment/society so it feels like they’re in control? “Sour grapes” is literally as old as Aesop’s Fables, if not even older.
The book this is from, Radical Markets[0], provides a unique perspective and is worth a read. It contains some very creative solutions to real problems and helped me to realize how small the box is for current policy debates.

[0] https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11222.html
Yes however it is definitely a way for employers to save a bunch of money while convincing employees that they are better off too. The whole smokescreen of we will give you a bunch of money "for free!" that goes to your HSA and somehow that is better value for you than a traditional PPO. In much the same way that 401k contributions are better than a pension.
I agree, I quite enjoy them in TypeScript where I rely heavily on inference.

I suppose it helps that the types aren't strictly required too, so you can side-step them if necessary.
Except I/O is still slower than CPU...
Code is worked out until it has few enough bugs for the customer to accept it. A program bug count is a function of how it will be used, and how sloppy the developers (or their company) thinks they can get away with, it's almost no sensitive to how easy or hard it is to find and correct the bugs.

That said, Java's type system sucks, you can not extrapolate its problems into a general concept.
> Then Remington borrowed $225M which it transferred to S which then bought back its stock X from Cerberus.

hmm. so, who is willing to loan Remington $225M in that situation? it seems like "recently bought by private equity company known for shenigans" would discourage banks and prospective bond purchasers?
Nah, dirt won't make them really sick, but it will expose them to all kinds of bacteria which studies have shown could help prevent asthma, allergies, and other problems down the road if you expose them while they are young. I wouldn't recommend exposing a kid to every cold and disease you can just trying to get them sick, but playing in dirt seems to have benefits that spare them from reoccurring problems later.
I don't see how your desire is incompatible with the comment above it. You can give all your money to deserving causes. By the definition of the previous post, you have then succeeded in life, because you have no money left. If you don't give money to deserving causes and happen to have some left, you have been cheated by life. It's pretty similar to what you say (except it gives you more options on what you want to spend on).
since your employer is willing to invest in this, wouldn't a custom proxy solve your problem? just whitelist the s3 buckets you care about, and have people access s3 through the proxy.
And reduces chances of outages... which is good for both customers and AWS.
The thing I find craziest about PDF/A is it isn't really a format in itself, just a vague promise not to use certain features in the ensuing file. Whether any reader holds the file to that promise is something I'm quite doubtful of. Instead I suspect most readers will do their best to display anything they're handed, happily passing it through any of the hundred-or-so, possibly legacy-code-powered sub-format decoders the file author wishes - leading to a massive attack surface.

From a developer's point of view, when trying to enforce that submitted files are strictly in PDF/A format, from what I can tell there isn't much more you can do than dissect the file looking for umpteen disallowed features.

Is there an ISO-compliance validator to anyone's knowledge?
OK, but why would I want to help sick people in need by paying a business which is going to skim profit off the top for shareholders and pay executives millions? Who other than the middleman thinks that's a good idea?
It would also be pretty easy to incentivize. Have an annual physical and save $X a month on your premium. We do it for other things like smoking already. Plus many examples in the car insurance world.
This is almost the definition of the slippery slope fallacy.

No one is arguing there should be no deterrent at all. The argument is that the current punishment is too high and is well beyond being a reasonable deterrent.
> Traditionally, strong/weak typing refers to how easy it is to "trick" the type system into doing something it wouldn't otherwise want to do.

Right, and autoconversion according to spec is something the type system does want to do. It uses type information to do it, in fact.
Remote, in-memory key-value stores: An idea whose time has come and gone? [pdf]
I think that, well, HN comments aren't a good platform for someone looking for a wide audience.
It is largely treated as a minor ticket in NYC as well I believe.
World’s First ‘BioSolar Leaf’ to Tackle Air Pollution in White City
ag -o 'https?://s3.amazonaws.com.*?\/.*?\/'| awk -F':' '{print $1, $4}' | sort | uniq | cut -d'/' -f 1 | sort | uniq -c | gsort -h -rk1,1

For anyone interesting in finding out the occurrences in their codebase. (Mac)
Given that 40% of the budget for the typical subway comes from fares, that sounds unviable
http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA-2018-AdoptedBudgetFeb...
Greed and the profit motive are proxies for resources not being infinite and so we have to make hard choices about who gets what.

What doesn't get managed (observe->think->act if needed) gets squandered; and if we squander resources at the societal level that would just be stupid. We don't have the abundance of the modern era because luck is on our side, we have it because our management practices have grown unbelievably efficient over the centuries. Economic forces are the most effective way of triggering the management cycle; and because of that are necessary.

The need to focus on the material (which manifests as greed and profit seeking) is an ugly fact of life in the same way that needing to eat regularly is an ugly fact of life. It'd be better if we could get rid of both, but there are practical considerations to bow to.
Since she's debating economics: maybe jail for some scares others...enough to make back the $22K spent for them?
> The kinds of bugs that get caught by a static type system are also caught by a good suite of automated tests, where every test is written before the production code that makes it pass.

Mostly, but it depends how you're using the type system. I have a talk (slides at https://dlthomas.github.io/using-c-types-talk/slides/slides....) that ends with enlisting the C type system to statically catch a "you called this from the wrong thread" error - with no run-time overhead.
Yeah, that looks competitive. It doesn't have the one highly specific fund I wanted at HSA authority but it's got everything you really need.
You're confusing a moral judgement rooted in emotional conceptions of 'justice' (what one 'should' do) with a logical response to a systematic problem (how to most effectively ameliorate antisocial behaviour). Which is, in a nutshell, exactly why retributive policing and the carceral state have failed spectacularly.
I read once that a soldier in Russia was supposed to fire off nuclear warheads once when faulty sensors erroneously indicated that America had already done so.

Had the system been a mathematical contract, we would all be dead. Instead, a hero determined sat pondering whether he should do it and then realized the sensors had to have been defective as he wasn't dead yet.