skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the same reason I like libraries and book stores. Especially used book stores. You can find some interesting books at "random". Generally random of course. But these are books that would, 9 out of 10 times, never be recommended to you by an algorithm. Taliban by Ahmed Rashid was one such book. I found it late last year by accident at the library. Totally changed my perspective on the war on terror. A way better understanding on how 9/11 came to be (the book was published in 2000). That led to the past year of reading history books on various subjects. And I'm happy. While my amazon account only ever recommends tech and business books to me. Which all generally sadden me.

Oh plus, this was a few years ago, I road tripped through the Oregon coast. I went into used book stores and bought a metric fuckton of old school pulp fiction crime noir books for like a buck each. All published in the 20s and 30s. Holy crap, so awesome. Again, never would have been suggested any of those if I was walking around and picked random books to look at.

Random and physical is nice. Digital and "recommended" has its place. But the real world can't really be replaced.
> The whole debate about nutrition confuses me.

It is only confusing if one spends too much time paying attention to those who want to sell you something, or develop some sort of guru personal-brand (I vomit in my mouth a little bit when I write things like "personal brand").

Here's what most people need to know:
Eat unprocessed food, mostly from vegetable sources.

This means no refined-anything (no added sugar, no white flour, no hydrogenated-fats, etc.)

The less ingredients the better. The more you recognize the ingredients as something you could grow in nature, the better.

I imagine I will be bombarded with paleo-something, keto-whatever, broscience, etc etc. You don't need any of that. Eat unprocessed food, mostly from vegetable sources and you will be way ahead of the vast majority of western people in terms of having a healthy nutrition.

It's boring, unsexy and it works.
Isn't that the desired outcome? Ideally it seems like coke and pepsi would be extremely expensive and a rare treat. Meanwhile the non-sugary beverages would be the ones most people drink.
Well, the question is being asked on a forum which (at least historically) has been tech minded entrepreneurial folks. So asking the question to that type of audience would naturally garner an answer heavily skewed by that audience. Assume that the asker of the question understands and accepts that, so you are free to simply answer whatever comes to mind.
Looks like 9 menu items: https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/full-menu/chicken-and-san...
India’s BharatPe raises $50M to help merchants accept digital payments
Why People Don't Read
this is cursed.
I remember looking into startup ideas for an FBA venture and the forums being incredibly sleazy most of the time.

That was years ago, no surprise this is the result.
This answers my comment how? Please see below comment regarding vertical integration. I would never argue that “Elon related company X” will succeed because Elon. Honestly a lot of vitriol in these comments. I’m out.
> "Hackers are not, by definition, concerned with: womens rights, lgbt things, nazies, anti-nazi, flat-earth, anti-vaxers. these things [...] should be heard, but this does not have to be a precondition to be a hacker. [...] unwelcome atmosphere for many non political hackers." vs. "In conclusion, inclusivity should not be reserved for people 'just like us'."

Which one is it? You cannot critize that the ticketing is not inclusive enough and complain about talks on just that aspect at the same time. The ticketing process is at least better than the first come first serve stuff there was before, it's not like you couldn't reach out and get tickets afterwards if you had special circumstances.

And the "too much left" politics angle for every CCC event is tiring to be quite honest and was addressed at the last(?) congress. You're not forced to attend talks you're not interested in. I've not seen people being shut down for being anything short of alt/far right nutjobs at these events. The camp is a pretty open event organized by a club that has several outreach programs, I don't really get how this text came to be or how it fits together overall.
9: nine
A: ten
B: eleven
...
10: hexTen
20: hexTwenty
30: hexThirty
...
100: hexHundred

My issue is that 1000 is hexThousand, but when working with hex numbers, its far more logical to group them in 4s.

0x10000 is a number more deserving of a name than 0x1000.

In effect, I want to call 0x10000 as "hex-thousand" (correlating to the number where 16-bits overflow). And 0x100000000 as "hex-million" (correlating to the 32-bit overflow number).

Of course, that leaves 0x1000 and 0x1000000 as ambiguous.
Agreed, I can't help but believe that subsidizing sugars in general is ridiculous.
This article is total rubbish. The CIA spies on Germany, France and even (yes even) the UK at times. Of course it spies on the UAE.
It goes even further.

An experiment: go to the pet food aisle of a grocery store, and try finding a dog treat/biscuit that doesn't have added sugar.

Treats labeled as "chicken" or "bacon and cheese" have sugar as the second, third, or fourth ingredient.

Sugar is omnipresent even in pet food.
Practical Electronics for Inventors
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/687619.Practical_Electro...

Title is slightly wanky, but it's the best non-textbook beginner guide I've found, since it actually does contain all the math & theory a hobbyist will need. The explanations are very clear and most motivated people with high-school math should be able to follow along. It's not the best to read back-to-back, but has detailed explanations of lots of areas of electronics that make great primers/refreshers. I had it out last week for a quick refresher on notch filters. Doesn't go into tremendous depth, but more beginner/hobbyist friendly than Art of Electronics shich is similar (and excellent) but aimed at EEs instead of hobbyists.

For something even more beginner-oriented any of Forrest Mims' books (formerly published by Radioshack/Tandy) are great but a little dated, and don't cover anything more modern than discrete logic and don't provide much in the way of theory. Excellent introduction to electronics books though, many fun projects for getting kids into the hobby who want to dive a little deeper into electronics vs. hooking up modules to an Arduino.
> An OOP purist would tell you to abstract-out your fancy private logic into a DI-injected service that can then be tested separately.

Many OOP purists don't seem to think about ways the language itself could work differently to support them better. All these guys seem to remember is their set of favorite hammers.
Try clicking on the 'web' link under the HN title and going through the google search results page.
This is all way too close to home, but I legitimately think the time I spent on arch made me more productive on linux machines.
Am genuinely curious. Why can't C language be extended to do this ?
- If someone else bought an audio book, I would like to be able to access it. I can't if it's audio-only.

- If I want to buy and listen to an audio book, I wouldn't be able to understand the speech without seeing the text. The text gives my brain additional information to process speech. This is much more relevant for music where lyrics help me hear the vocals in the music.
>but on most things there's almost no difference between they and Aliexpress. I can buy the same products from Aliexpress way cheaper and have them delivered in 2-3 days.

That's what a lot of FBA vendors are, middlemen. Some Chinese companies learned about this and are now doing FBA directly.....but the quality is the same and so are the prices.
A Penny for Your Books (2015)
Does that mean everyone pronounces it "Dvorjak"?
It is sad that the photo illustrating this article shows cheeseburgers. Cheeseburgers haven't killed anybody. Cheeseburgers are not junk-food. Stop making amalgams.
As a joke I want to make a documentary on Mister Rogers quoting everything he says out of context and using all the documentary cliches to make everything look Orwellian.

"But who is this man, and what is this much-vaunted 'magic kingdom' he peddles to children?"
I imagine it's usually because of her other views.

I'm just guessing though, I haven't looked closely.
We could solve it overnight simply by acknowledging that people are free to live their lives as they choose. If we allow people to snow ski, to sky dive, to ride motor cycles without helmets, then we should allow them to eat nothing but table sugar if they so choose.

Some might say that these people are driving up health care costs for the government, and my answer to that is that the government should not be paying for people's health care. It enables bad behaviors and it forces people who make good choices to subsidize people who make bad choices. Which is legitimately bullshit.
I worked at KFC for several years in Australia, the chicken was quite fresh.
My concern with this statement is that restaurants can surely cook you "real" food and thus allow you to have your time back.

Where I think we've made a big cultural mistake is in food _industry_ and in franchising.

In essence, food isn't as "real" when it's meant for shelf life, to always look and taste the same, and to scale for every point of presence where it's intended to be sold such that there's strong profit margins / brand recognition to be made.
Which school? Do you think the inner city kid goes to school with the Palo Alto kid? The Appalachian kid? The son of illegal alliens? We live in bubbles and we wonder why we can't make sense of each others realities.
It was literally an offhand comment speaking to a small portion of the preceding comment. And you manage to spend 3 paragraphs tearing apart my “logic”. Aren’t we supposed to “Assume good faith.”
That approach (circumventing the specifics of the law through technical workarounds while still violating it in spirit) seems unlikely to succeed for the same reasons as Aereo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_In....
Honestly, I'd say an even bigger problem is that we add sugar to everything. Ketchup? Sugar added. Some brands of milk? Sugar added. Lunch meat? Sugar added. Bread? Made with so much sugar that people from other countries complain that American bread is practically cake.

Sure, sugarry drinks are a problem, but they're a part of the larger overarching problem that is everything has sugar, so for something like soda or dessert to taste particularly sweet, we add even more sugar.
java.com will give you a JRE distribution only. e.g. all the parts that you need to run java, not the parts that you need to develop it.

The oracle.com link that you refer to is the source for the Oracle JDK, which includes the compiler, etc.
> If the next recession is large enough, I can believe that premise.

The great recession is so named because it is supposed to be much worse than your average recession - a one-in-a-hundred-years recession. It makes sense considering how the financial system leveraged itself on toxic assets.

The question is, how confident can we be that we won't have two horrific recessions in a row? At face value the concept of a "one in a hundred years" recession seems to imply that this won't happen. But as an individual I wouldn't say I'm particularly confident that the market is sane.

Interest rates are going down to join the rest of the world in negative interest rates, despite the states supposedly being in an expansion. Shiller PE ratios suggest stocks are overpriced similar to pre-recession and pre-depression highs. The latest batch of IPOs seems full of companies that are not profitable and may never be profitable and yet your average investor is now exposed (through e.g. their index funds). A seemingly infinite pool of capital with nowhere to go props up wildly questionable companies like WeWork. Real estate values in top cities have blasted off into outer space as this infinite pool of capital looks for more places to park cash.

Maybe we can add in more ordinary concerns too, like average citizen's debt rising, corporate debt rising, sovereign debt rising, etc

It's quite possible that the next recession will be of the ordinary variety, but it's not impossible we will end up with Great Depression 2.0 at some point. If I were a fiction writer imagining the setup to a next great depression, I imagine it would look similar to the world today.
Could you please review the guidelines? The bar for substantiveness here is higher than this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> You can accept the deal, reject it, or make a counter offer.

Or just get it from TPB or whatever.
|a| = 2
a^2 = 4
I hate how some people are completely fine with making drugs illegal, but when you mention putting some restrictions on food it becomes the end of the world, as if something edible can't be a drug.
Diabetes seems to be one of the main causes of heart disease.

> People with diabetes tend to develop heart disease at a younger age than people without diabetes. In adults with diabetes, the most common causes of death are heart disease and stroke. Adults with diabetes are nearly twice as likely to die from heart disease or stroke as people without diabetes [0]

[0] https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/diabetes/overvi...

[1] "What if Heart Disease and Diabetes had the same cause?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofq-8ToY2fc
>More than 100 million adults — almost half the entire adult population — have pre-diabetes or diabetes. Cardiovascular disease afflicts about 122 million people and causes roughly 840,000 deaths each year, or about 2,300 deaths each day. Three in four adults are overweight or obese. More Americans are sick, in other words, than are healthy.

Jesus Christ. Aside from many of the obvious causes I think the public just has no idea what a "good" scientifically supported eating habit looks like. They turn to fad diets that go around social media. Their heart is in the right place but it's become difficult to determine BS from scientifically supported habits- even on this site I see fad diets being promoted. Internet searches usually turn up blogs touting fad diets and not real science. The deck is stacked against the average citizen in this regard.
How does low infant mortality refutes the poor economic prospects of millenials, a generation having less kids than any to date? That is a complete non-sequitur.

Median household income is very marginally higher than ever, while debt is substantially higher. Cost of living isn't inclusive of the cost of education that is probably the biggest economic burden unique to millenials.

No one is debating that you can (momentarily) make a lot of money as a software dev without a degree. It still accounts for a small portion of the economy.
NetNewsWire 5.0 Now Available: Open-Source RSS Reader for Mac
Your FICO score and detailed credit history already serve this purpose to a large degree. Everyone knows that affects whether or not you can get a loan (and thus purchase a car or home), and on the surface that seems fair enough, but is already fairly discriminatory. But it's far worse than that; if you have a bad credit score, you can't even rent an apartment. And many employers won't hire you. It's not just used to calculate what interest rate you get charged; it's used to judge your value as a human being in general.
I'm likely slightly biased due to recency (I'm researching the effect of tobacco taxes in LMIC's) but I think the tax component is critical here. It's not strongly emphasized here but as it's coming more into vogue, sin (or as they're rebranding) health taxes, are one of the more effective ways to get people to cut down on using something. I don't have the data on the company side, just the consumer side, but if you look to other inelastic markets such as tobacco, increased taxes have been massively effective. Add to this the fact that the higher taxes on these goods can also lead not just to reduced health care costs for individuals and the nation, but also to increased revenues that can be allocated for net positive uses. It'll also likely be more effective pound for pound than tobacco taxes because (well, I'm just wildly speculating here) I can't imagine Kellogg's and Kraft engaging in some of the schemes that the tobacco companies do to avoid taxes.
This may sound pithy but it sounds like your solution to your discomfort over class divides is to stop using these services so you don't have to experience the class divide and get to avoid that cognitive dissonance. All you're doing is reducing the amount of income that those people would have otherwise received if you had participated on the demand side of this market.
> Why aren't heat pumps used these days?

Heat pumps are likely not used in New York state because most of them cannot warm the house sufficiently during the coldest winter temperatures (0F or less).
> When it comes to voters’ decisions about their choice of candidate, most forms of paid political persuasion, including TV ads, online ads, mailers, phone calls, and door knocking, have no discernible effect in terms of changing people’s minds.

So the billions spent on campaign advertising essentially has no effect? I don't buy that for a second, otherwise it wouldn't be a billion dollar industry.

We know that advertising has a psychological effect on people, and advertisers know how to exploit this in susceptible individuals to sell their product.

We also know that the winning margin of the 2016 election was only 79,316 votes[1]. So Cambridge Analytica didn't need to influence millions of people to succeed, as long as they managed to sway some who were already on the fence to not vote for Clinton.

This article attempts to discredit the documentary by focusing on whether CA succeeded or not, when the real issue is private data collection, user profiling and tracking, and the usual evils of advertising, which they conveniently choose to ignore.

[1]: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/hillary-clinton-marg...
For Mechanical engineering, I strongly suggest picking up a used copy of the Machinists Handbook. Excellent handbook for MEs & Machinists that contains nearly any type of reference information you could want on those topics.
I think this is just the media you are consuming.

For the most part; health care workers, government agencies, etc. are all pushing the same message: avoid processed foods and added sugar, don't drink your calories, eat more vegetables and fruit, choose whole grains and healthy proteins. This article reads like hundreds of others I've seen over the past decade.

For reference: https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/
>Spies are needed because humans engage in war.

Wars happen, because there are classes of people who declare themselves necessary to other, lesser classes, and they are allowed to establish secret control over resources of the classes in ways 'the others' get prosecuted for, or worse .. have bombs dropped directly on them, should the actions be reciprocal.

Like, the CIA tortures. It assassinates. It causes rife and turmoil in its target of focus. It regularly lies to the American people about what it is doing - it is "supposed" to.

And yet, it is a major cause of upset and turmoil in the world. Seriously!

So, maybe I can listen to your story about why 'war happens, game over man', and I can just get your attention long enough to explain this: we, The People, do not need spooks.

Only War-mongers do.
Addition is reversible, in the physics sense.

So for example one typical quantum gate is called for physicists CNOT, or you would call it in computing a generalization of the XOR gate. We physicists would not think “Oh XOR is irreversible because A ⊕ B = B ⊕ A even when A ≠ B, so the same output can come from two different outputs.” That is just not what reversibility means to us.

Contrast this with boolean AND, which we would say is irreversible. What’s the difference? It's that we think of all of our operations as being automorphisms, they map a system back to itself. So when we are looking at CNOT/XOR, we are thinking about a system which looks like this:

(t increasing)-->
A ---.-----
\
\
B ------⊕--

and if you have the output "1, 0" from this system you can infer that the input was "1, 1". In that automorphic sense XOR is reversible, even though given the output on wire B alone you cannot decide what A or B was.

Contrast with boolean AND, where if I give you the output "0, 0" you cannot genuinely determine whether that came from "0, 1" or "0, 0". It could have come from either place.

So the automorphism (x, y) ⇒ (x, x + y) in fact is reversible in this sense; there is an automorphism which undoes it. The weirdness that you are identifying comes from the fact that you were actually considering the automorphism (x, y) ⇒ (0, x + y), which is a composition of the addition gate above with an ERASE gate, (x) ⇒ (0). Ignore the erasure and you get a reversible process again.

You might know that AND, OR, and NOT are universal: you can write any circuit from N bits to 1 bit by enumerating all of the inputs which could set the bit to 1, using AND and NOT to build “masks” for those inputs, and then using a final big OR-gate to see if any of the masks was triggered. By de Morgan's laws, you can build an OR gate out of NOT and AND; and then it is not too hard to see that you can build both NOT and AND from NAND: so we say that “NAND is a universal boolean gate.”

To get a universal reversible system you just need to go to three bits. Two working options are the Toffoli gate “doubly controlled NOT” and the Fredkin gate “controlled swap,”

Toffoli = ([x, y, z]) => [x, y, (x && y)? z : !z]
Fredkin = ([x, y, z]) => [x, x? z : y, x? y : z]

The universality of Toffoli is very easy to see from the universality of NAND: because Toffoli(x, y, 0) is actually just (x, y, x NAND y). However the fact that you start with an “isolated” bit and then it becomes “involved” in the computation, this is where you eventually start to need to erase bits if you do not have unlimited amounts of memory. [Fredkin is a little more difficult to reason about but for example Fredkin(x, 0, y) = (x, x AND y, (NOT x) AND y) and so you can then build both an AND gate directly from this construction and a NOT gate with y=1.]
Any stimulant is likely to make you act more aggressively.
That's a GREAT name!
In my opinion, from their inception in the early 1970's, the official US food recommendations have been flat wrong, captured by the food industry from the start. The Food Pyramid and its successors, for instance, are far from an ideal diet, and actively harmful to people like me.

I don't want the same people who made those decisions to have the power to force me to eat more of this or less of that. Even if they happen to be right now on a particular issue that is not their track record.

If I were to eat according to USDA recommendations, or even the recommendation of the American Diabetes Association, I think my diabetes would be out of control, compared to being held in remission by a low carb diet.
Yes I am, in fact, a citizen of Russia. I'm also a US citizen. I know this because there's been both video and statistical evidence, as well as numerous reports of electoral district vote counters simply falsifying final vote tallies, people being bused around to vote in multiple districts, etc, etc. Statistical evidence of vote count manipulation is actually pretty damning. If you calculate the distribution of vote count _percentages_ across all electoral districts, you will see that there are spikes around multiples of 5 and 10%. That means the vote for the "right" candidate was rounded up to an even number on a statistically significant number of them.