skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel like the lack of this kind of thinking helps keep people dumb about what a URL looks like, so that phishing links like www.bank-of-america--interestpayments.com/your-account/secure.html keep working. The less people are parsing the few domains they really do interact with, in favor of specialty URLs for every little thing keeps it all confusing.
It would be far better to give one thousand risky cutting edge projects one million dollars.
1. It would be easy to refute, wouldn't it? If you or anyone in your family have ever been ISIS members, by all means correct me.

2. I'm glad to know that you have empathy for war victims. When has a war with USA ever saved lives? Didn't the ramp-up to the planned Syria war look just like previous ramp-ups to our wars in other Muslim nations? Those media projects were later found to be completely false (as has the Syria gas narrative, at this point), so why would we have believed this project?

3. USA wars are always conducted in USA media first. That is the time to fight, and that's what Gabbard (and many others) did. We seem to have broken their spirits, too. After really trying on Syria and only failing because they made so much money hyping up Trump, their recent efforts on Venezuela were fairly half-hearted. The world might be getting safer...
For IntelliJ try Codota (www.codota.com) which trains AI on semantic models of Java code
Are you trying to say "not everyone has the cash on hand to put down a bigger security deposit?" If that's what you are trying to say, just say it. If that's not what you are trying to say then I don't understand your comment.
You dont need to get rid of Windows to support Open Source software though. My favorite Open Source tools work no matter what OS I am using be it Mac, Windows or Linux.
Ineptitude doesn't create any legal liability. And loss of potential revenue isn't a basis for establishing damages.
The GDPR is intended to protect user privacy, not "competition". Everything has side effects, but if a monoculture of online services is the price, my guess is the drafters of that law (which I'm not a huge fan of, FWIW) would be OK with that. This is the tech industry, we're always just a few decades away from everything being disrupted anyway.
Steve Jobs introduce the iPhone. This is one of the best product introduction and showcase ever made in hardware and software history. This presentation helped me to shape the way to pitch products to investors or clients. I was 29 by that time, my career shifted thanks to the iPhone.
After Chris Hughes destroyed The New Republic [1][2], it would be hard to believe he has no strong financial interest in taking apart Facebook.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8705410

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8743425
I just discovered that raw multi line string don't work on visual studio 2017...
It's not peak housing dysfunction, but rather peak entitlement. Why is it important to accommodate people who might want to live in or move to an area despite local incumbents' wishes to not have their neighborhood change? Does everyone have the right to live anywhere they want to live without having to pay the necessary price to be there? For example, does everyone have a right to expect a residence on a Hawaii beachfront? And if not, why is it reasonable to portray a city or state as somehow lacking because it serves existing constituents?

It makes sense that the Bay area would be priced high given its tremendous desirability (which may be tapering off now). If people are willing to work there for low wages, then that is their choice - they have opted into a tradeoff they are OK with, and they/others should not demonize those who were already there and want to preserve their culture/way of life/standards of living. There are numerous affordable places to live in the US that are not [New York, San Francisco, Seattle, etc.] - you may not have every big city amenity you want, or maybe even be able to do the exact job you want - but such compromises are also just a regular part of life, aren't they?

To me the reframing of this issue as a policy problem, or a rich versus poor thing, or through use of pejoratives like "NIMBY" serves to distract from the plain truth, which is simply that people are acting in their own self-interests. And yes, this includes the folks who believe they have an unalienable right to live in the Bay area and demand that local governance be replaced with top-down forceful governance (overriding local zoning policy). And the reality is proposals like the one around the missing middle will not solve the underlying issue - it just shifts the timeline around a bit until population growth brings us back to the same point anyways.
Google Maps JavaScript API No Longer Compatible with Mootools 1.5.x
That's not true! Peninsula voters never got the chance to vote on the November 1962 BART referendum.

Instead, on April 12, 1962 the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors opted out, citing high costs and concerns over shoppers leaving their county for stores in Downtown San Francisco.

Keep in mind that Silicon Valley did not exist yet. There was no support for BART in San Mateo County-grassroots or otherwise. Many Peninsula civic leaders were also against it–including JR Clinton owner of the San Mateo Times (predecessor of San Mateo Daily Journal). Also opposing BART was David Bohannon the developer of the Hillsdale Shopping Mall, Tom Casey of the San Mateo Co Development Associations. They, and the San Mateo Times, published Op-eds arguing that BART was not needed; instead more freeway lanes was the proposed solution to congestion woes.

The neighboring Santa Clara County's obsession with building and publicly financing the Expressway System (Page Mill, Oregon, Central, Montague, San Tomas, Lawrence, Capitol) didn't help either.

You can read more about it in BART: The Dramatic History of the Bay Area Rapid Transit System by Michael C. Healy.
I wish there was a paywall/geoblocking/whatever-the-next-discriminator-is flag so I could just filter submissions. Or at least to mark it and save the disappointment. It seems more necessary as the web becomes more closed.
If you catch the problem at conception, the easiest way seems to be to abort and try again.
I feel that you're describing companies as they should be, while the quoted comment line is describing them as they have become treated.
Benchmarking: Do it with transparency or don't do it at all
I think the key words there were 'too big,' not 'growing.'
A drug that good tends to sell itself.

There will be those that don’t change their practice ever once they graduate (seen a few).

Things get more complex when you have dozens of treatments for a condition with no clear winner.
What a life, sales are up 20% and there are frowns all around...
They don't discourage children from browsing the site, just from creating accounts.
Mlflow: Open-source platform for the machine learning lifecycle
Just to be perfectly precise, dividends are usually taxed as income, but an increased valuation as a result of a buyback would only be taxed as capital gains when the shares are sold.

If there weren't a separate capital gains rate, then the only difference would be the tax would be collected when the shares were sold rather than when the dividend was issued.

However, if you had the intention of reinvesting your dividend, then you would buy new stock with post-income-tax dollars, whereas a buyback would increase the value of your stock holdings without using your own post-tax money.
Yes. All these historians inspired by Kuhn's construction of the "revolutions" are completely missing what the discoveries are, and are misusing the words like "overturning." There are also a lot of philosophers that also simply don't understand what they talk about.

The Newtonian Laws are still good enough for most of the common calculations of the effects of gravity, where they aren't enough we are using the improvements by Einstein, but technically these are still the improvements for the calculations in the extreme ranges. So it's not that it's practical to say that what Newton is "overturned" when one still needs his very formulas every day.
Aha:

https://www.fcc.gov/media/policy/statutes-and-rules-candidat...
Not an expert but I'll give it a shot: Company has extra money and wants stakeholders to get a cut. They can either give all the stakeholders some money based on how much stock they have (this is called paying dividends), or they can buy back stock, raising the stock price (reducing the amount of stock means a given stock now corresponds to owning a larger stake in the company). Dividends would be taxed as income for investors. The increased stock value would only be taxed if/when it was sold for a profit (capital gains tax).

Edit: dlp211 points out the income from dividends is (generally) taxed at the same rate as long term capital gains.
That would make a $500 million dollar difference so in the end, it doesn't really matter.
All that would achieve is the next popular video sharing website not being American. YouTube has a lot of viewers, advertisers, content providers that aren’t Americans.
Does the quality of the ads you see really make you confident that they're paying attention to all of these data points and have an amazing algorithm that ties it all together?
If you force it to be optional, we will at least introduce choice. A market emerges with those that opt-out. Referral-only credit?
California does not have low property taxes. Tax = rate * assessed_value. assessed_value is huge if you purchased during last 7 years and goes up 2% every year
>Should targeted ads change their age appropriateness with the content of the viewed material?

Yes, they most definitely should. A video that specifically targets babies/children should not have ads that are 18+.

Where else in the world would you view media for children and be shown ads for drug dealing dramas?
LOL so just forget any changes to inventory commingling and counterfeit merchandise.
I don't understand what this is supposed to be, other than bad, poorly-labeled fiction. Can anyone explain?
Only if they want a first-world lifestyle, though.

Cut out meat, suburban lawns, and the cars that go with them, and the earth could support 10B people right now, at the living standards of a typical Millenial in a cosmopolitan metropolis.

Unfortunately, there's pretty good indications that most people on earth want those meats, suburban lawns, and cars, so I think it's more likely we'll get war instead. But it's totally doable, at a standard of living that people will grumble at but could abide.
Hopefully this creates a lot of wealth and amazing businesses in Brazil. Why should they not be able to use their land to make profit?
I have personally paid for hotel rooms at incredibly popular major hotel chains using a debit card.

You can also definitely rent a car some some of the major carriers without a credit card. See: https://www.bankrate.com/personal-finance/smart-money/can-yo...

Definitely not all locations all the time (see: "somewhat more complicated").
I'm assuming you would agree for some electronic material. How do you pick and choose which should be forced to follow the law?
It's because we're hella young out here. Relative to the East Coast anyway (I mean, London has Roman ruins...)

Do an image search for old timey SF and you'll see: the Sunset was sand dunes until about last Tuesday, etc. Dudes used to pan for gold out by Lake Merced.

Also, this was the weirdo town. Bohemia on the Bay. Serious folk didn't really come here to be serious and sane. The old line was, "All the crazy people move to California, and all the crazy people in California move to San Francisco." To which residents add, "And all the people too crazy for San Francisco move to Berkeley."

So yeah, you've got a young town full of nuts and flakes that no one really paid much attention to until the last ~50 years or so, whadda ya expect, eh?

Things are changing though. I was over in the Inner Sunset the other day and the beautiful people were there casting me in the shade because I look too close to homeless on the hipster/homeless spectrum.

My concern is the weakening of the commitment to keeping the wild areas of the Bay Area wild. SF is the largest city with the most wilderness around it in the world. Marin Headlands, Wildcat canyon et. al., nearly half of the peninsula is forest. I saw a coyote in someone's front yard on Junipero Serra the other day not three blocks from Stonestown Mall! In a neighborhood of single family homes, FWIW.

I don't think it would be the best of all possible worlds to make the bay area look like Manhattan or Tokyo. On the other hand, it sucks that I can't afford an apartment in my home town, let alone ever own a home, despite making programmer money. I can't imagine what it would be like if I didn't have tech skills. I'd probably be living in a tent under the freeway.
Civilized countries are the size and population of two of the cities in my state. Have you not looked at a map? And 1Gb being symmetrical fiber means I can use my internet as a VPN or let friends and family use my plex server as my own personal netflix, or stream as much of the internet I want and not affect anyone else in my place.
I remember talking to someone about how Intel's acquisitions performed poorly and he pointed out infineon and I shook my head.

You think some ceos should be under a covenant that they can't acquire companies the same way that alcoholics shouldn't drink.
I gave in-state jobs to show there is a tech environment. Indeed, the goal is to promote remote work, make living there point-and-click easy, and attract a critical mass of introverts who want open spaces and who, by simply being there en masse, attract a growing population.
Prop 13 makes it so that revenue from residential doesn't keep pace with costs over time. Parking lots don't really add much in terms of city services costs - no schools, parks, water treatment, etc.
$14B in goodwill! Crazy.
California does feedback some income tax revenue to localities (mostly to schools).
The Innovation in Politics Institute
uSD cards are not broken. You just have to not buy from unknown manufacturers that just put some third party parts together and call it done. And if you use quality power supply and wiring, to avoid brownouts, SD cards can be quite reliable. Choosing an appropriate filesystem may also help (like f2fs).

I have several multigb PostgreSQL databases (with checksumming enabled) running from uSD cards for years, scraping data from the web hourly.

I find uSD cards quite reliable, actually (for rootfs use), in contrast to what's being said online all the time.

I also like that it's removable. If it breaks you just pop in another $4 32GB card, restore, and continue where you left off. Compared to soldered on eMMC, that's much more user friendly.
Not to take a position in this debate as a whole, but I just want to interject that there is research suggesting that you actually are more likely to be affected if you are aware of the other person's conflict of interest. (Can't find a link right now...)

If memory serves me right, the theory is that it makes you overestimate your ability to stay objective and unaffected, so you're effectively lowering your guard, or something along those lines.
I am saying that amongst many other things which are self evident. Not everyone has the situation and finances you do. Not everyone has the same buying markets and opportunities you do. Not everyone can exist within their social, family, and work situations with your "truths" and "rules". One can exist without using electricity...doesn't make it comfortable or practical AND it's not an argument for the idea of entering into a third party holding and selling and not securing your info in order to get it.

I don't really understand why you are being defensive of bad practices and policies with the "nobody makes you sign up" argument. I never understand why people defend these things and blame the victims of them.
> Was it always this bad and we just didn't see it before?

I definitely remember reading some pretty-accurate-in-hindsight scare pieces about Facebook's only way to monetize around the time they IPO'd.

That said, it's almost impossible to separate signal from noise with the earliest folks to cry wolf, and it doesn't help that some of them (looking at you, Peter Schiff) love to trot out their sky-was-falling predictions after the fact as proof of their clairvoyance.

While they all nailed it with Facebook, I don't remember a single piece about Google's similarities as they were rolling out Gmail/GChat/GDocs/GDrive for "free".
Using hot button social issues for personal gain, what a guy!
One case, poorly phrased, is hardly a "long list".
Because our voting systems are nearly all First Past The Post, voters are forced to vote strategically, based on who they think others are also likely to vote for (and their recursive assessment of those voters' assessments). In game theory, this is known as a Schelling focus[0], and it makes it difficult to reveal voters' true preferences for leaders and policies (as opposed to other systems like Ranked-Choice[1] or Approval).

This is often theorized as one reason for the effectiveness of broadcast advertising: in addition to individual influence, one becomes socially influenced by the awareness that millions of others have seen the same advertisement at the same time, and thus can be relied on to use brands and products as signals for identity or group membership.

So in this sense, even as the power of broadcast is waning in favor of social networking, broadcast media (such as televised debates) still have tremendous power in powerfully nudging the recursive algorithm: even if I know for a fact that a TV interviewer is cynically kneecapping Gabbard/Yang/whoever, the mere fact that I know so many others are seeing it will influence my assessment of their odds, and discourage me from "throwing my vote away", knowing other viewers are likely reaching the same conclusion.

Incidentally, as opposed as the MSM was to Trump during primaries, I think he still leveraged this phenomenon in his favor; partially by being so shocking that he gained regular airtime, thus seeming more prominent and significant, but most especially through his IRL rallies, which acted as a powerful signal of popularity, inline with the common knowledge model described in "Rational Ritual"[2].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory)

[1] https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)

[2] https://press.princeton.edu/titles/9998.html
Edit: Turns out I saw this on HN earlier. It has a huge problem: it's not portable C!! Have fun with the __attribute__, unistd.h, __builtin_clz, etc.
Our Experience with Apple Search Ads: Solid Balance
Note that this is just one of the largest, not the actual largest. The actual known largest appears to be this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syringammina_fragilissima
Assuming you pulled it straight from the sea, it'd probably be salty and slimy.

The internals of cells are mostly water, protein, and DNA, which don't really taste like anything to our tongues. Most sugars are stored as glycogen, so you wouldn't get much sweetness. There also wouldn't be much texture, as it's lacking any sort of bone or shell.
Not in CA - Prop13 + corporate shell board of director transfers means the tax rate never increases, and after 40+ years, that means a lot of properties essentially pay a fraction of the taxes they should.

Prop13 has had a LOT of unintended consequences.
Oddly enough, the housing structure of the SF Bay Area has a certain resemblance to ... the Boeing 737 Max. It's a system where some one parts/aspects/dimensions are kept at a certain backward (but once functional and "good") level while other parts/aspects/dimensions are automated/modernized to the hilt (basically to game regulation and so markets).

Elaborate efforts have been made to adapt the contradictory parts, efforts that worked adequately for a while but which are now coming apart, leaving a situation with no way forward at all.
what's lost? my SSN/name/address/phone? or what? what is exactly lost?

if SSN/birthdate/name is gone, then anyone can fake me online, apply credit card under my name.

am I missing something? what was stolen from me?

so yes I can say I worried for 10+ hours and Equifax will pay me $250 no questions asked, but this is not exactly what I want to have.
Interesting. Do you have videos showing cattle, warehouses, trucks etc.? With so much devastation, it must be easy to land helicopters anywhere out there and film the whole thing from close distance.
She was a very daring lady who advocated for women actually enjoying sex themselves. She always did enjoy sex herself, and I believe that's in part because she paid her own damn bills, never mind that women generally made less than men and this meant she had to actively be frugal.

These are some of the principles I've tried to follow post divorce: that my agency matters more than my nominal income level and relationships with men need to be based on liking them, not on them paying my damn bills.

I was a homemaker for about two decades. I don't regret that at all, but I'm absolutely not willing to be treated like some man can just "buy" me because men my age (give or take a few years) typically have a lot more money than I have.

My agency is something I value far more than money. I'm not willing to give it up for a nominally cushier life.*

(Insert joke about someone wishing to live in a mansion and - poof! - they are now a live-in maid.)

Back then, a woman expecting to enjoy sex was a radical just begging to be branded with a Scarlet Letter. This is likely why this article talks about everyone focusing on her statements about affairs with married men: The real issue was "That hussy thinks women should actually have orgasms and, worse, personal agency."

I basically stopped reading Cosmo after she stepped down as editor. It just wasn't the same without her.

People who think she was just going the "sex sells" route really don't understand her life's work at all.

She was a quiet radical who helped foment a bloodless revolution in this country. The world would be a better place with more people like her.

* (For those who don't recognize me, I was homeless for years while people refused to take me seriously as someone who needed an earned income. Meanwhile, men were offering me money or places to live in exchange for sex.)
> While describing a pixel as a little square is frowned upon in a world of signal processing, in some contexts it is a useful model that lets us calculate an accurate coverage of a pixel by the vector geometry

I wish people would try to calculate the coverage of some other reconstruction filter instead of just separate little squares. I’m not convinced it would be more expensive, and would hopefully give better results (less griddy artifacts, better spatial resolution), especially for images that will be rotated or resampled later.

If we assumed a radially symmetric kernel, then coverage would just be some monotonic function of the distance from the pixel center to the edge, and this function could be approximated using some low-degree polynomial and computed very quickly.

(Maybe this has been done?)
I used to think they would follow the xanga / myspace train and be blown out of the water by something but that's not the case anymore. They have proven they can just buy any competitors or quickly copy their features, and "all my friends are on fb/insta/whatsapp" will keep the vast majority of the users entwined in one way or another. Regardless of usage metrics, if you only use their apps for social, that's a win in itself.
Wow! Really nice! Thank you!
Cloud Irregular: Amazon won't spin off AWS, and that's too bad for AWS
It remains marginally higher competition than the unit folding, which seems to have been the alternative. At least one party has an alternative. And unlikely as it may seem, that party may yet choose to sell to others, which is also better than zero.
Methinks Google would have a hard time establishing, or even admitting to, ineptitude as a legal defense.