skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I blame the Freemasons. /s

Seriously, though-- whether true or not, there's undoubtedly an impression of extensive graft throughout the U.S. construction industry. Perhaps there are just so many people involved in such work that the inevitable few bad actors stand out more (a dishonest one is more likely to have stories told about them than one who simply does proper work for a fair price), but there is almost a tradition about it. If you talk to almost anyone directly involved in the industry - at least where I've been - they seem to act like these 'shady' types are a noticeable and constant presence.
I am wondering what does this mean (if anything) to the huge amount of US public debt that China holds.
That would stop shooters, but we would see a great rise in arsons, car attacks and fertilizer bombs.. so kind of back to square one.
Bitwise operations: PRI = (facility << 3) | level

In term of readability, it becomes clear if you use octal and not decimal representation: the last digit is security level whereas the others are facility number.
Maybe low priority / insufficient resources, or the issue didn't get triaged and brought to the attention of the right person to fix it quickly enough. The fix wasn't complicated at all once it was eventually in, so I don't think it was any deep issue with the framework.
Sandwiches may become more robot-friendly in their structure, without losing their taste.

Picking up trash is harder. But much of the high-precision picking can be replaced with coarse vacuum-cleaner-style action. The biggest problem likely will be determining what is trash and what is nit.
People tend to assume that 100MWh less energy from oil means 100MWh more electricity for the same transport need, but ICE is horribly inefficient so that's not how it works. Most of the energy in that oil is just wasted, an efficient conversion would be too heavy and expensive for a motor vehicle, and oil is so energy rich you get plenty of performance without bothering.
I found that interesting. I've also heard it said that unemployment is higher in France compared to England. But their (France) productivity is higher. I wonder which is better...
Does anyone know what happens if we label them a currency manipulator?
You’re assuming the loan stays at the bank as a deposit, but normally one takes a loan to give the money to someone else. As soon as the client goes to the teller to get her money, or a cheque she wrote is cashed, or whatever, the balance sheet of the bank will change again (and shrink unless whoever gets the money deposits it again at the same bank).The asset (the loan, the fact that the client owes money to the bank) will stay. The liability (the money the bank owed to that client) will disappear, together with some of the liquidity that the bank had in its balance sheet. It’s ability to lend money has disminished and eventually it will need more liquidity and/or financing (in the form of new deposits, interbank loans, bond issuing, capital raising, central bank credit lines or whatever).
Because it may go lower.
The billion-dollar bet to reach human-level AI (FT subscription needed)
Do you mean in all areas of life or specifically companies / shareholders?

A person cheating on their spouse would pretty commonly be considered to be doing something "immoral"

Yet it would be ridiculous to make something like that illegal

I think the attempt to make moral and legal always align creates plenty of hazards itself

Especially if the moral code the law is based on something external and nowhere near universal (like religious sources, which disagree with each other, etc)
Yes, very disapunting.
This is just not true. Twitter puts way more effort into blocking and controlling what goes on its platform then "we like living on the edge" 8chan. At this point, there was community that kept scores and celebrated shoot outs.

At this point, even original 8chan creator called to close 8chan.
I think talking about it openly was the right thing to do. People are going to rag on them for this decision (though I assume most will understand) and you have more control over the message if you get out there first rather than waiting to comment til there's a backlash. Maybe it's just lipservice, but I actually liked a lot of what they said in the post about it being obvious 8chan had to go, but that they want to have more objective policies in place rather than deciding who is bad enough to drop on a whim. They made it pretty clear they don't intend to be the internet content police force and that they don't even think this will stop 8chan from existing, so it's not like they were bragging about doing any good really. All-in-all seemed pretty reasonable in my opinion.
I think it's because they aren't really supposed to be human readable. It's trivial for an application to do (PRI % 8) to get the severity, and ((PRI - severity) / 8) to get the facility number. I'd assume that's why severity only goes to 7.
Thanks for the research, I was having trouble figuring out where this came from exactly. I was hoping to find translations of the original laws, but no luck. Somehow I imagine that this info is hard to come by now, unless you visit some European library archives.
The total cost of ownership trend for electric vehicle declining. Not only in energy costs, but most drastically on manufacturing costs. Estimates like BNEF’s show that manufacturing costs will reach parity with internal combustion vehicles within the next decade.
China has an autocratic regimen, it's difficult to gather what the population there truly thinks about US trade tariffs, when they all pretend they never even heard about Tianamen.
Faihimuddin on Twitter: “Buy YouTube Views HTTPS://T.co/GsIQOueCGd” / Twitter
There is a process for amending the constitution. If enough citizens feel it should be amended, it can be. It's happened a number of times in the past (although not recently). The big danger is in thinking "we don't like that process, let's circumvent it". Selective circumvention of the law and the constitution eventually will lead to anarchy.
The Final nail:

You agree with the following claim: The specific observation of water boiling at 125°C in 1 atm falsifies the claim "water only boils at 150°C+ in 1 atm".

Since being falsifiable is your requirement for making warranted claims about reality, then, in order to be warranted, you'd need to have a specific observation that would falsify the claim "The specific observation of water boiling at 125°C in 1 atm falsifies the claim 'water only boils at 150°C+ in 1 atm'". But now the claim, that whatever observation you may describe would falsify the aforementioned, would also need to have an observation that would falsify it.

Any claim that some claim is falsified by some observation will also have to have a observation that falsifies that claim. Thus leading to an infinite regression (have fun showing your position is warranted when you have to detail an unending list of observations), circular regression (we both agree circular reasoning is not reasonable), or a first claim that is not falsifiable.
Except for the autofocus mechanics of course. Those move around before every shot...
I've run a business in China for over a decade and follow the macroeconomic situation here closely.

Here's the deal:

The Chinese economy became investment-driven instead of export-driven following the Great Financial Crisis. Exports are less important to GDP than real estate construction and infrastructure development (subways, high speed rail, bridges, etc).

In terms of exports, Europe is the biggest trading partner, not the US. The US is number 2.

The Chinese economy has a big problem: the government can drive GDP as much as it wants via state-driven investment and debt, but much of that is malinvestment and the debt cannot be self-funded. So there is and has been a large debt problem. This is why the Chinese economy has been slowing and the government has not found a politically acceptable way to tackle the problem.

The US trade war is basically kicking the Chinese economy while it's already down, but it's not the key source of the problems here.
Sadly the main site is gone, but here's a talk (transcript, and you can also open the YouTube video: https://web.archive.org/web/20160113163745/http://blogs.plos...

The gist of it is that people without future/community think jihad can be their community and their life work... Guess what, it also applies to people thinking you need to be a warrior for the "suppressed white race"..
Show HN: ProjectCamp – Project Management and CRM Application
> small languages which reach "smallness" by giving access to a limited set of extremely powerful constructs

That's one of the things I really loved when working in Smalltalk: the language gives you all of the building blocks necessary to build more or less then entire standard library, which makes it extremely simple to implement custom control structures for your application. That, and the fact that you're programming directly in your running application of course.
These may be the common things, but none of them is particularly discoverable, predictive and actionable. And indeed, the advice the article presents later amounts to more policing.
Another good one is roads. The old way of thinking was straightforward: "we've got too much traffic, let's build more roads!" Now we realize that building more roads encourages more people to drive. There seems to be practically unlimited demand for roads.
You're willingly choosing to work on an interesting problem that you otherwise would not have access to, and, let's be real, our compensation and autonomy as developers is far from that of servitude. Plus you can quit any time.

Slavery here really hyperbolic. We're talking about hard work that is both interesting and rewarding.
Most financial systems are designed to have room for mistakes.

Banks keep ledgers of transactions instead of just the balances, so that if an account balance is off, it can be recalculated from the transactions.

Transactions can be cancelled in case there was an error.

Invoices are often checked by humans before they are sent to customers, introducing an option to catch errors. If the customer receives a faulty invoice, they can contact whoever wrote it and ask for a correction. And so on.

Of course, there isn't room for error in every corner -- having a flaw in an authentication or authorization protocol could be very costly to recover from.

But in general, the assumption that in finance in general, there is no room for mistakes is simply false.
Freedom of speech is not unlimited. Different countries set it in different places. In the US there aren't many limits, beyond the old "shouting 'fire!' in a crowded theater" thing. But in Germany you can't deny the holocaust, for instance.

Maybe we as a society need to decide that some things are just beyond the pale. Trying to indoctrinate young people into ideologies of hatred doesn't promote free and open discourse, it shuts it down. Let's just take sites like his off the Internet - nothing of value will be lost.
Even using the carpentry analogy, I suspect the point is to avoid ruining something on which a lot of time was spent. The material cost of most raw materials isn't very high, but ruining something you've already spent hours crafting is extremely costly.

The other thing to bear in mind is that there is always more work to be done than time to do it. You have to factor in opportunity cost. As many other commenters have said, ultimately it's a balance which depends on your company's particular situation.
The GDPR does actually contain a provision - Article 12(7) - which allows for that sort of indicator:

>The information to be provided to data subjects pursuant to Articles 13 and 14 may be provided in combination with standardised icons in order to give in an easily visible, intelligible and clearly legible manner a meaningful overview of the intended processing. Where the icons are presented electronically they shall be machine-readable.
We're far passed the point where banning guns would be effective. There are almost as many guns in America as there are people. It would be like trying to ban cars, or phones, or air conditioners. The numbers just don't work.
It seems like having a known honeypot to capture conversations of would be evil doers would be much better than to further force them underground into the likes of Tor. Who is going to be able to mine conversations for advanced warnings once they are there?

Also, the silencing of dissidents seems like the wrong move in general for all internet companies. The truth can tolerate being harassed, bashed and unliked. What it does not seem to do so well with is a regime that does not tolerate the free flow of ideas.

I'm okay with the very worst people posting on youtube and twitter. Those platforms can require an extra login to determine who is so interested in these videos. The removal of videos on the basis of dislike does not seem to be the solution. I'm not even certain that demonetizing them is the right answer, because even that can create a money trail for police and detectives to follow.
Collaborate with your team directly in Kubernetes with Okteto
We are exploring a new model of collaboration for Kubernetes with Okteto. The idea is to build an application that turns Kubernetes into a self-service platform. With this, developers can directly create a namespace per feature/bug, deploy the entire application there, and then invite the rest of the team (or just the devs involved) and work together there, instead of developing locally and passing PRs around.

We recently started to explore this development model, and would ️ to get some feedback from the community. What do you think of developing like this? https://okteto.com/docs/reference/team/index.html
>The solution is to ban guns..

There are logistical problems with that solution as well if we're being honest. How are you going to locate all however many hundred million firearms there are in the US? Even if it's just banning some weapons. How are you going to locate them all?

Even if you could, these terrorists would just use truck bombs.

As far as solutions go, the best option available in our current situation is probably to let our counter-terrorism operatives actually operate. At least up to now, they've been operating with kid gloves with respect to domestic terrorists.
So mass shooters have

1) experienced violence before, often early

2) sometimes experienced psychological problems, maybe as a result of 1)

3) sometimes had some reason to become angry (before the mass-shooting, such as getting fired)

4) sometimes explore/study other mass-shootings before committing one themselves

5) had the means to carry out this crime

Ok, with a bit of flexibility (other than point 5) that could describe every last one of my coworkers, for none of which there is any chance whatsoever they'll ever commit a mass-shooting. The idea is ludicrous.

Typical psychological social-science "insight".
>when they all pretend they never even heard about Tianamen

The usual reaction I've seen when it is acknowledged (even if generally) is to note that it is "unhelpful" to talk about it.
I understand it's just an essay, but if their goal is "to find new, data-driven pathways for preventing such shootings" they need to add more data/evidence.
This might explain the sudden bitcoin spike today?
I'm finding the mental health angle less and less convincing. People are capable of doing these things in their right mind. Is the manifesto a part of the "social contagion"? Treating this as solely a product of mental illness minimizes it. Plenty of people experience abuse and trauma at a young age and don't murder dozens.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's irrelevant, not at all. But the ideology can't be ignored, it can't be separated from the act as if it's interchangeable.
Original essay, as text, on Paul Graham's website: http://paulgraham.com/ds.html
It's strange that everyone brings up symptoms of poor education and healthcare. Racism, violence, shootings, these are all symptoms of lacking infrastructure. I feel like banning 8chan, instituting stricter gun policy, it's all bandages on a deeper wound.
That's because "public safety" was the tool they had at their disposal. Unless you think their claims that public safety was threatened were credible, what makes you think that when they can use "hate speech" AND "public safety", they'll just use "public safety"?

Wait, let's not think about hypotheticals. Let's think about actual restrictions of rights and how they've played out. Who gets arrested for racist speech in the UK? Nigel Farage? UKIP members? Nah. Some college student who, as admin of an organization, said white people shouldn't come to her minority events.[1]

Well, that's a bummer. But surely Germany knows how to handle hate speech right? Well, unless you offend a friendly head of state; then my dear, it's a legal process for you! [2]

Man, you know what's awesome? Ensuring that the state doesn't take religious sides. For that, we shall ban all religious symbols in schools, as France did. Surely this will not affect members of a minority religion, right? Certainly Muslim schoolgirls won't be suspended over headscarves. [3]

If you give the state the power to deny rights, they will deny them to the people it's easiest to deny them from.

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

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Böhmermann_affair

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_scarf_controversy_in_F...
HMRC Crusade Against Contractors
Did you call for Comedy Central to be shut down after Larry Wilmore said:“I don’t want to give [Trump] any more oxygen. That’s not a euphemism, by the way. I mean it literally."

Or after the shootings of Congresspeople, arguably inspired by all the celebrities calling for violence?

Or is your outrage (and CloudFlare's) partisan?
I disagree about banning guns. There are other weapons mass murders could use. Anthrax in the mail and homemade bombs have both been used in US history. We cannot reasonably prohibit access to all dangerous materials. Even a large SUV can be used to kill/injury several people.

I think the biggest gains come from focusing on mental health. I see this is just one symptom of a much larger mental health crisis in the US. Other symptoms include high depression rates, high anxiety rates and high addiction rates.
Agreed. The US was probably the first country to rely on personal arms ownership to establish their independence. Its important to Americans.
I agree with this 90%, but I'm not sure about the state of GUI apps after Windows 7. Up to Win7 though, most applications simply used native controls, sometimes wrapped by WPF or WFC.

I used to write for WINAPI/GDI and I used to loathe it; I mostly disliked the way messages were handled by default: huge switch statements. After switching to Linux and checking out the many "toolkits" I find myself craving for some GDI-esque toolkit. GDI was bad, outdated when I started writing it (circa 2009) but things "just worked", looks were consistent and controls would do the same across applications. The GNU/Linux counterpart is a mess: drag & drop sometimes works across toolkits, sometimes it does not; some toolkits are unwillingly to standarize with each other; the looks are all different, the functionalities too. Need an IME? Well here's one for KDE and another one for GTK. And if you use a different toolkit, chances are there's no IME for you. Right clicking on text-boxes and getting the same default options is great, so is being able to extend the same text-boxes systemwide. This is simple on Windows, but GNU/Linux requires one implementation per widget type per toolkit. It's all fragmented and no one cares. I miss GDI, I crave for a simple standard X11-wide widget system. Users do care about widgets working the same on different applications and they don't care about which toolkit is being used, specially non-tech savvy people. I believe those issues are more linked to the meme of "year of the desktop Linux" never arriving than anything else, really: UX should be consistent.

Well now I'll end my rant.
Opening paragraphs:

"One of the most common types of advice we give at Y Combinator is to do things that don't scale. A lot of would-be founders believe that startups either take off or don't. You build something, make it available, and if you've made a better mousetrap, people beat a path to your door as promised. Or they don't, in which case the market must not exist.

Actually startups take off because the founders make them take off. There may be a handful that just grew by themselves, but usually it takes some sort of push to get them going. A good metaphor would be the cranks that car engines had before they got electric starters. Once the engine was going, it would keep going, but there was a separate and laborious process to get it going..."
What is the effect of any on the desire of making the yuan an international reserve currency?

Will (foreign) holders of Yuan just shrug or will it lead to more caution, do they have a choice?
To be honest, this is just part of a larger problem. Even if we have "trusted" media companies, that will just increase centralization in the space by making it harder for indie outlets (who, in the age of the internet, can break significant stories well before larger media corps). Much of the material used by such corps these days comes from videos posted on the internet, any way. Grainy smart-phone video posted to the internet has been behind a large number of stories over the past few years.

Add to this that it doesn't solve the problem of deceptive editing, a la Covington kid. The real problem here is still that people are by and large sheep who care not to read past a headline. If this sounds rude, perhaps it stems from my frustration with the issue. See case number one, mass shootings. As tragic as it is, you remain more likely to be struck and killed by lightning than shot in such an event. Most deaths involving guns are suicides. We still get several days of air-time for each, while all the while we have real problems. Homeless populations, poor educations, starving children in africa. Focus on those first, and go by order of what affects your nation most.
> makes claim without evidence

> asks for evidence that the claim is false

How about not making baseless claims that invariably reflect poorly upon you in the first place?
I actually think a lot of Project Managers do a good job, and are valuable, but surprised nobody has mentioned David Graeber's Bullshit Jobs theory.

That is documented at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs and https://www.vox.com/2018/5/8/17308744/bullshit-jobs-book-dav....

It specifically mentions "taskmasters" who manage/create work for others, and project managers might be put into that category by some (but again, not by me as a general rule).
Right, but they need to be conscious of their end user. If they secure by default, and someone upgrades, their software stops working. Should PHP have had these defaults to begin with, yes absolutely. But now we're all stuck with a million miles of code that will break if register_globals is turned off. That's the point. Everything you've stated above there might as well be an alien language to the majority of people using this stuff.
Someone can be sane but still have poor mental health.

Healthy people don't kill innocent civilians.
For effective gun control, there needs to be effective border control.
I try and do this with customers, if I slow the response they often figure things out for themselves.
Two of the main points...

>> practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

>> most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives.

In other words, they talk to other people about their plans and grievances beforehand, so there is an opportunity for intervention.
Au contraire