skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Makes sense. There was far more space then. When I was a kid the Hollywood hills looked very empty, now you see more housing than mountain. We're building up instead of out from now on and that's a lot harder.
> thought mathematicians would know better what makes sense and what not

I'm no mathematician, but when I studied linear algebra, I remember index starts from 1 in matrix. I think MATLAB just follows that convention, it's "Matrix lab" after all.
Add in pensions as well. Where do you think CalPers invests their money? Under their mattress?
All that my eyes can see is the six-speed stick; all else is forgiven.
I think SELinux/AppArmor is a good idea for services like web/ftp/irc/ssh servers, wayland compositors, notification daemons (like dunst), external devices managment daemons (like udiskie) etc. But it isn't a good solution for applications which a user could try to use to read or change arbitrary things in the system for no malicious reasons. But, as I understand it, the Flatpak model of having the application sandboxed and then only allowing it to access files which are selected by the user in the GTK dialog is a great solution. It's just that I haven't seen one for command line applications. E.g. how should we protect ourselves from someone exploiting a vulnerability in vim to access our private documents, which we could potentially want to edit with vim ourselves?

EDIT: it seems there is some progress on making a Firefox Flatpak: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1441922
I would do it in a heartbeat but for lack of a way to charge it.
That is awful. I can't believe you can accidentally put your car in reverse by dropping something. They created an unacceptable problem by solving a non existing problem like most car UXs these days.
I just try to avoid Amazon because of the horrible warranty experience I had with an Amazon Fire Kid Edition tablet
So who decides which company stays and which goes? Merge them all?
This is a classic example of Hayek’s “The Fatal Conceit”. There is no way any government or person would know everything or be able to see the future so as to manage such economy of monopolies.
They can be banned from amazon at least
I think that's mostly just cynicism. If you actually chart document lengths, you are far more likely to see logarithmic growth or something asymptotically approaching a (finite) value.

More importantly: this is both to be expected and rather benign. It's expected because regulation simply grows with the complexity of society, which is increasing at a similar or even larger pace. Most of our wealth is due to specialisation and research. And with the benefits of, say, flying cars, comes the need to establish rules.

It's also benign because almost nothing of it will ever concern you, or any other specific individual. You can fly your car without knowing the crash test procedures for it. They are relevant only if you are building flying cars. In that case, you do have to familiarise yourself with the rules, but that is a task of the same magnitude as it was with existing regulation for (regular) cars, which no longer concern you.
The solution is clear.

Regulatory bodies need to take into consideration size, age, and frequency of violation by the regulated in terms of exacting punishment on new entrants.

For instance; BigFin fintech company gets caught violating Anti-Money Laundering regulations. Big fine.

SmallFin fintech gets caught: slap on the wrist, thou shalt make a remediation plan, and here are the milestones you have to meet.

SmallFin continues doing business, but is on the regulators radar.

SmallFin caught again? Fine.

Now. Let's say SmallFin dissolves, but the key players move and incorporate as YetAnotherSmallFin (different Corp, mostly same people). Get caught? Regulators should look at the people who have been dinged before, and should know better, and regulation should be less forgiving based on that.

The fact is, a great deal gets hidden under "the Corporate Veil" that probably shouldn't be so easily divested from by those looking to abuse the system.

A regulator should by and large be a constructive guiding hand; not just ssmern as something to be worked around in the process of finding new and interesting ways to do shady things.

The catch here is you need to be able to attract high quality people to run the regulator, and I really have no solution for that.
Looking at Russia bankrolling politicians and parties across EU legal vs not legal does not appear to matter much.
I always invite people who is in favor of affirmative action to make it into a general rule to address gender segregation.

Here in Sweden we had last year one higher education program where every single student is of the same gender. 100% gender segregation. The profession that those students graduate for is also unsurprising the profession with highest gender segregation.

I have toyed with the idea that maybe a good step to right the wrongs and get all industries numbers closer to 50% would be to create a new tax which gave under represented genders a tax cut and over represented genders a corresponding tax increase depending on how gender segregated their chosen profession is. That would create an incentive to break gender norms in a country where 88.5% of women and men work in professions that is considered gender segregated, and employment rate of both is almost identical.
I think the issue is more than just exposing full legal identity. The shopping experience on Amazon is an abstraction. When looking at Product X, on different days, different sellers may be in the "buy box". From the customer's perspective, they are buying from Amazon, not the vendor.
> button to toggle reverse

wtf!

Anything that alters the transmission should be big and require definite intent to move.
You never choose to be a "member" of your country. It is imposed upon you.
Imagine if California just had proper trains ? Sydney, Australia has driverless trains now.
Independent distribution is still extremely cheap and easy - there are still platforms out there that will upload music to Spotify and many others for free or for a small annual fee. Spotify offering the service directly isn't necessary for distribution to be accessible to all.
I hope they leave my favorite YouTube channel alone

The Lockpicking Lawyer

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm9K6rby98W8JigLoZOh6FQ
You can still get location data from any email on an external mail client (mail.app, Mail app, etc with images loaded). Gmail only proxies images in the browser client (and maybe the the mobile app?).
That's the most fun I've had in days. Thank you!
Honesty? This is tech. This is business. You're speaking a foreign language to both.
This diagram of an open source pancreas has about 3 devices and 3 cables too many. A coin cell can run the control loop forever.

I'm guessing industry hasn't produced this in a streamlined (reasonable) device because it will never be certified, and open source is just a codeword for subverting the regulatory process. Which, from a diabetes sufferer POV, is understandable.

The dark cloud on the horizon is that if the FCC throws a hissy fit because you can install new software on your wireless router, imagine what the FDA will do if you market your device as compatible with this open source software that claims to automagically control your insulin pump.
What olden times are the article and the comments speaking of? Scrolling is still faster when selecting while wiggling the mouse, at least on Windows 7 with Firefox, for me. Just tried it right now to make sure.
The article references energy efficiency regulations specifically. Is the energy code in California significantly stricter than the IECC?

There are nice aspects of energy codes. For one thing, potential renters and buyers have little insight into how efficient a house or apartment really is. Since landlords and builders aren't paying the utility bills they are incentivized to reduce upfront construction costs at the cost of higher utility bills (and environmental damage) going forward.

If these codes are effective then they might be worth the increased construction costs. I'm not necessarily saying that they are (I don't know, maybe California's code is filled with frivolous, ineffective details; the article doesn't really give any examples) but I think just the fact that they increase upfront costs doesn't actually mean they aren't a good idea.
Breaking the 100bps barrier with Matrix, meshsim and coap-proxy
The US has a much larger population and is the largest economy in the world. It would be unusual if lobbying there wasn't much larger.
Honestly the reply you got was sort of justified. I find that when HN discusses crypto almost nobody has any idea what they are talking about.

>The NYAG, in its original injunction, said they did not want to prevent Bitfinex or Tether from continuing operations, but did move to prevent Tether from lending any further funds to Bitfinex, a move Bitfinex opposed.

I am not sure what evidence you are talking about, but if NYAG is satisfied then I am too. Also in the grand scheme of things Tether is irrelevant. There are bunch of stablecoins available these days.

What is your complaint against binance? They are solvent, they don't liquidate people because they don't have margin trading enabled yet, they are opening a regulated US exchange in September. When they got hacked they've covered the loss themselves despite being unregulated.

Of course Bitmex automatically liquidates people, what other option do they have? Collect KYC info and hire an of army of international debt collectors? You know your liquidation price before you open a position. If your position gets anywhere near it's because you are being an overleveraged gambler rather than a disciplined trader. It's 100% your fault.

I've heard more complaints about Coinbase or Kraken not processing fiat withdrawals for months at a time, than I've heard about Binance or Bitmex doing anything wrong.
miss you!
Projects without a code of conduct are either immature or led by reactionaries, and in either case have a much higher risk of toxicity. If you want to get something done in a communitarian fashion, implementing, clearly stating, and enforcing rules of conduct is an absolute must.
The graph that shows the percentage of corporate profits versus GDP seems like it shows nothing. GDP goes up, profit goes up at the same rate, so profit as a percentage remains static.

The comparison to the S&P500 is confusing. Why would GDP be linked to the S&P500? GDP is a static measure of what the economy is producing, where the S&P500 is a measure of expected future profits. You wouldn't expect them to track the same.
That allows you to opt out only after having had your first open tracked. Presumably a technological solution would allow the client to opt out of even that first pixel (hopefully while not having to opt out of displaying non-tracking images.)
Surprised Microstrategy didn’t sue you guys (or vice versa). They built some access / authorization tool named Usher which seemed to be a total flop (why a BI company was even toying with this perplexes me)
There is no reason SPVs shouldn’t be supported onshore.
Not to mention the costs associated with Amazon recovering that money from a third party as substantially lower than for an individual.
Once the email is opened, you can't opt out of being tracked.

You could opt out of future emails I suppose, but there's not really a way to stop this. Nothing stops me from embedding my own tracking pixel in the email either.
Sadly, this is the moment where the terms of service that do permit such work would have been precisely what we need to counter the direction of the entire post. I hope you or someone are able to discover it and cite it here. (I couldn’t manage to find the terms from my device, but that’s likely more my device’s fault than any. I’ll try again later if I remember, but it might be too late for today’s comment.)
>Even so, they are united States (as opposed to, say, Australia where the so-called "states" are for all intents and purposes merely administrative subdivisions of the continent, and could be remade by passing a law in the federal parliament)

I don't think this is accurate. Prior to federation there were no Australian states, there were 6 independent colonies.

The status of the states are part of the Australian Constitution to make changes (such as creating a new state) would require amending the constitution and thus a referendum.

The Australian States have quite a bit of power its one of the "challenges" we have here because of the way our constitution is written in order for a referendum to pass it requires a double majority you need an overall majority as well as a majority in a majority of states (i.e 4 out of 6 states must also have majority support) this is one of the reasons constitutional amendments are so difficult and rarely pass here.

Similar thing with our senate (Upper house) each state has equal representation in the senate so both Tasmania and New South Wales have 12 Senators despite much smaller population in Tas. This is in contrast to House of Representatives (our lower house) is not equal (there are 5 seats in Tasmania vs 47 in NSW) this has a lot of implications in our political process.

As far as people not feeling loyalty to their state that's mostly true but there is still a lot of friendly (or not so friendly rivalry) especially in sporting events.
Of course, because NNs are hot with investors now and Tesla wants their money.

Companies frequently misrepresent how their technology works to the public. Typically they'll do some small portion with the hot technology for buzzword compliance, and then build the rest of it with an actually sensible, boring, and tailored-to-the-problem technology stack, oftentimes with a lot of proprietary legwork done by their data scientists and engineers. This way they get the best of all worlds: investment dollars from gullible investors, PR from journalists that want to hop on the next big thing, a product that actually works, and misdirection so competitors hop on approaches that aren't going to work anyway.
OT, but Rhode Island is far more populous than many other states (double that of Wyoming, which is the least populous state); they have 2 house seats whereas there are 7 states with only 1. They are the least populous state with 2 house seats though, and some counts put Montana (1 house seat) as more populous.

Another fun fact: there are about 10 cities in the US with a higher population than Rhode Island, and San Jose, CA has a similar population to Rhode Island with one-eighth the land.
In some applications with scrolling work areas, I'd end up trying to move it in pixel perfect straight lines when dragging stuff past the visible work area, so as to speed up the refresh and keep the mouse in the part of the border where you get maximum scrolling speed.

I always assumed that Windows95 was just scared of mice, so if you shook one at it, it would either run faster in fear, leaving a trail of random disc sectors, or suddenly hide under its special blue blanket and refuse to come out again.
It does address it. He specifically says that it is table stakes for his software and that they are leaving it in. You may not like that but it is addressed.

Personally I like that response, though I think they have legal problems in some jurisdictions. They didn’t try to weasel word their way out.
> give themselves the seed cryptocollectibles and profit off of those

In CryptoKitties' case specifically, yes. Some developers bake a fee directly into the smart contract.
R is actually the basis of one of the CORAL2 benchmark sets, and there are published scaling results to 5000 cores as far as I remember. I've not done it, but presumably you can substitute its BLAS with a GPU version, the same as with an OpenMP-parallelized one to get performance for anything linear algebra-ish.

[HPC clusters on which you'd run CFD typically don't let you run for more than days, let alone months. There's probably no reason you couldn't use R the same way as Python for such things.]
Inventory commingling could also be a problem here— the vendor you’re ostensibly buying from isn’t actually providing the product you receive, and there’s no way to find out who did provide it.
Free market typically means a market in a system where the government provides some guarantee of protection over fundamental negative rights to (for example) life, liberty and property. In that frameworks the answer to your questions:

> Does the market a business exists in give you the freedom to not be burgled

Yes, to an extent, freedom of property guarantees that anyone who burgles you will be punished

> Does it give you the freedom to not have to pay for healthcare for your employees

Yes. In a free market, there is no employee. Employees are simply one-man/woman businesses that you exchange money for in exchange for labor or time or a task (in the case of salaried employees). There is no reason why someone paying a business should have to explicitly pay for that business's healthcare. The employed business, even if a single person, should charge enough to pay for their health insurance.

> Does it provide some level of free training to those employees?

No. Nowhere in a negative right to life, liberty, or property is there a promise of free education.

> If you're a fisherman and there's another fisherman does the market ensure that other fisherman won't exhaust the ecosystem?

No, the ecosystem exists independent of the market (it preceded it), and there is again no right to ecosystem partitioning in the right to life, liberty, and property.
"where Medicare will set payouts below cost."

I think the data on what hospitals, insurance companies, and drug companies call the "cost" shows it's over-inflated BS. If they're lying and price-gouging, then whoever is charging them should demand payouts below their "costs" if they can't force them to do a reasonable profit above actual costs. Quick article off the top of Google with examples of the "costs" at hospitals:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/outrageous-e-r-hospital...
The court was careful to only make the determination that Amazon was a “seller” in this specific instance because of Amazon’s role in the sale. From the opinion[1]:

> Our decision, guided by Pennsylvania law, is limited to the question of whether Amazon is a “seller” based on its role in effectuating sales of physical products offered by third-party vendors. We express no view, for example, on whether other companies providing online marketplaces are considered “sellers.”

There were four factors the court used to help determine that Amazon was a “seller” (starting on page 12 of the opinion) and they all went against Amazon.

[1] https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/181041p.pdf
I fully agree. See http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesi... for why touch screens are the worst possible interface device, and when used while driving, they are the most dangerous possible interface device.
If I were going to buy into any theory other than coincidence my bet would be on an emergency patch situation where we're seeing the rushed deployment.

But it's probably just a coincidence.
Miss you too buddy! Hit me up when you're in Seattle next.
> Radical advocates of free markets (and anarchists) always seem to forget the violent nature of humans.

Radical advocates of free markets are often libertarian, and they rarely forget the violent nature of humans, which is why libertarians explicitly call for the existence of a government, limited in scope to defending a few enumerated rights, such as private property.
Vampires at least have a good reason to suck people dry.
> Seems like Amazon can just force third-party vendors to reveal their full legal identity to the customer then?

Minimizing the prominence of seller identity and maximizing that of the Amazon brand has been a key Amazon business strategy; they very much want sellers not to matter.

I suspect, though, that even were that problem cured, their commingling practice would leave them liable unless they also allowed buyers access to the identity of and the ability to reject transactions based on the original product source (which may not be the seller, due to commingling) with FBA products.
> You do have a saying

Typically no, since you are tribute to:

- your government being able to manage its funds well. Well too bad, they do a piss poor job at it and keep increasing taxes year after year.

- the majority during elections not voting for more government intervention, which would lead to more taxes as well.

Plus, your example with your significant other does not make sense since you do have a contract/agreement. As a citizen no such agreement/contract is ever signed with you: the conditions are imposed and force is used upon you if you refuse to pay taxes.

> If you don't want to participate to the society, then you don't participate to the society.

That still does not make taxation not theft, since you are never asked how much you want to contribute voluntarily for example: you never enter a contract as a willing party. Plus, let's say you don't want to "participate in society", the state will still find you and jail you for not paying taxes even if you decide to live on your own.
‘Massive’? I’d be surprised if they have anywhere near the incidents of tracking pixels that a bog standard small ad network has.

No one will be able to tell accurately until a ruling comes down but I believe this is a gdpr violation but one they won’t be fined for if they do basic location filtering for their tracking pixels.
People want a magic pill to be healthy, pretty, famous and rich. It’s human nature, we want everything right now.
I empathize, vehicle user interfaces are becoming terrible.
How about forging a startup focused on doing outsourced UX for automobile cockpits? Aim to be the "Apple" of design for the automotive industry.
I don't use OpenBSD for various functionality-related reasons, but experiencing that was an eye-opener. It makes me mad that Linux doesn't use such a clearly superior system, and leads one to wonder what other needlessly complex interfaces we put up with unquestioningly.
A really good article speaking to this is: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/01/what-wa...

Though, honestly, I find the use of Johnson & Johnson in that article to be more problematic by the day considering they clearly have done a lot of evil at this point.
Physical controls serve double purpose. When you are reaching for the button, you first touch it with your fingers without pressing. This allows you to target the right button without pressing it, and without focusing your eyes on it. Touch controls will trigger every time you touch it, so you can not find it by touch and then press it, thing just doesn't work like that. That steals your attention away from the road and into the screen.
We're not talking about renewing already-registered domains.
> Surely, even the most staunch supporter of the free market can admit that at a bare minimum, capitalism in this country is in desperate need of better anti-trust regulation to stop monopolies from crushing all competition.

Yes, I do agree. For example, we should stop threatening media platforms like Facebook and Google with regulations that would put any competitor out of business, either because the regulations are so onerous or because the regulations are so unimaginative that they accidentally rule out perfectly viable, and better, business models.

Perhaps we could enact a law that prevented regulation of most markets.
It's not so much why someone would choose this over that, as it is what attack vectors are added to which surface. Why wouldn't a bad actor be willing to jump back into a leaky sandbox?
Average internet speed up one year after net neutrality repeal