skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The central thesis of short term market movements (say day to day or week to week or month to month) being a random walk is about 99.7% correct.

This is a statistical reality, you can literally crunch the numbers! Behavioral finance has nothing to do with it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20942910
> Let's be honest, this is a shakedown.

The settlement money isn't suppose to be for prevention programs, it's to bolster public health institutions who are saddle with providing health care for tobacco related diseases that are a direct result of the misleading practices from the tobacco industry.

> Number of States that spend the CDC-recommended amount on tobacco prevention programs: 0

How much does the CDC recommend? How much are they spending? Your statement is designed to trick the reader into thinking states aren't spending any money.
The readme says that 'for profit' projects aren't allowed. Side projects can't be created for the purpose of making money? I'm not sure I understand the purpose of that restriction...

Other than that, looks awesome
I suspect it's because he works for Stripe now, which handles the electronic transfer of monies. Therefore, Stripe would have to know about Regulation E to be able to operate effectively in that space.

It has been my experience that when working at a company, even if you didn't know or care about the industry/field that company does business in before starting there, you can't help but learn the ins and outs of that field or industry while working there, to at least a partial degree. The particulars of that field will necessarily influence business operations, and therefore, what you do in that company in some form or another. How much one absorbs, and how much he is aware of this will depend on both the individual and the duties of his position, and whether this comes from deliberate training or cultural osmosis. But I don't think that a person could remain completely ignorant of the particulars of an industry after being employed by a company in that space.

That's my theory, anyway. Watch Patrick prove me wrong by describing how he came into knowledge of Regulation E by some other path than training or cultural osmosis while working at Stripe
This is a lie. He stated from the start he was hiding to avoid extradition to the United States for his journalism.
Where did people get this idea that every job must supply a living wage?
Madoff was a ponzi scheme that relied on new investment (since it was simple pyramid). Medallion fund limits outside investment (so there is no outside source of money) and has operated for many decades (ie more money was withdrawn from it than put in).
I've applied online mentioning HN.
I don’t think most commodities traders actually transfer or take delivery of the commodities though. Sure there are some firms that actually are engaged in the commodities business, and use the futures markets to offset price risk, but most traders in the commodities markets are basically just betting on commodities prices.
We the People March T Shirt
https://notredamevslouisville.blogspot.com/2019/09/we-people-march-t-shirt.html
https://notredamevslouisville.blogspot.com/2019/09/we-people-march-t-shirt.html
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
We The People March T Shirt
https://notredamevslouisville.blogspot.com/2019/09/we-people-march-t-shirt.html
https://notredamevslouisville.blogspot.com/2019/09/we-people-march-t-shirt.html
Hubble spots liquid water on a ‘super-Earth’ 110 light-years away
A ban would be devastating for those using ecigs to quit nicotine. I love the fruity flavors, and purposely started with those when I switched to ecigs. I figured that would help me get rid of the desire for tobacco flavor, and it worked so well that just the smell regular cigarettes would make me nauseous. It was a huge factor in my quitting successfully.
The person above is merely relaying their experiences that these communities indeed still exist. You can read this implicitly as: "having authentic experiences online is absolutely possible, if one is willing to find and seek them out, but you must be willing to seek". And also: that those that aren't willing to seek these things out themselves, will ultimately destroy these communities for they lack that same necessary passion required to have these sorts of interesting and authentic experiences.

Not everything communicated online is intended for the direct and easy benefit of yourself.
Was waiting for someone to mention Erlang.
Right, because you can't answer that without prior information. Log-odds is a step towards giving a function of prior information (but it is limited to the actual class of hypotheses investigated).
All effective trading is, essentially, insider trading. Not in the legal definition, but in the sense that to beat the market, you have to know something that "the market" doesn't.

Or, just get lucky.

The only personal example I have is from buying NFLX stock about a decade ago. I saw a news (Slashdot I think) story that Netflix's servers were having an hours-long outage. I can't remember if it was mentioned in the story that their stocks took a dip, or I just happened to look. Either way, I noticed that their stocks were down about 30% on that news, which seemed silly to me. The market was treating this like it was some kind of disaster for the company, whereas I was pretty confident it was a temporary blip.

I bought the stock, just a few hundred worth since I was in my first barely-over-minimum wage job at the time. Netflix got their servers running again, and the stock recovered the next day. I decided to hold on to the stock because, why not? Today, it's worth about 20x what I bought at.

If only I'd bought more.

My point is, I knew that the market was wrong, and an hours-long server outage wasn't a reason for Netflix to suddenly be worth 30% less than it was the day before.

To successfully pick stocks, you have to have some kind of expertise or insider knowledge to know when the market's wrong, and you're right. Most of us, in most situations, don't have that kind of expertise or insider knowledge.
How to Navigate the World of Book Publishing
Apparently the author forgot to look into clang blocks language extension.

https://clang.llvm.org/docs/BlockLanguageSpec.html
> _"But I hate when nanny stats bann [sic] something for political reasons, just like they are doing with trans fats (donut scare!) or cities with sugary drink taxes."_

It's not for political reasons, it's because the people enacting the legislation _believe_ that the government's role is to ban these. You can have a different philosophy about the role of government and disagree with the legislation, but that doesn't mean it's done for "political reasons".

To me, legislation for political reasons would be where you legislate something you may not truly believe in to order to satisfy a small minority (e.g. corn subsidies for Iowans) or to advance some exclusively political agenda (e.g. voter re-districting legislation).
Don’t know why you are being downvoted. Trans fats aren’t unhealthy like like eating too much sugar is unhealthy. Trans fats are “unhealthy” like lead and mercury are “unhealthy.”
Another comics creator, here: the fact it's a closed system unavailable to lurkers, on top of those things. Discord's great for some things (support-group kind of interactions that you don't necessarily want bared to the public), but it can create insular cliques real quick.
But anyone knows how this works. If high income is taxed, the rich will figure out how to get benefits without the high income. Humans are all somewhere between the compliance/noncompliance spectrum. In game theory, much of the time, the evaders win, but it's never a guarantee. If it was, everyone would do it.
> while you might be able social-engineer your way past it,

My personal experiences and various accounts I've heard make this "might" shift to "fairly easily". Why are you so confident that it has to be someone with inside knowledge?

> I would be shocked if someone like Jack Dorsey didn't have a password associated with his account that is required to make changes

I do not share your trust. I'd be shocked if he didn't NOW, but you are basing your assumption off of what...that he recognized his status as a high profile target? Were that the case I doubt this vulnerability would have existed.
Hm... while I think that the report is generally correct, it also comtains a clear bias in some sections. It was written by people on the inside, after all. Also, some of the character background was sourced from journalistic articles. I would have hoped that such a report had better sources for things that should be part of government records.
There's nothing other than an annoying chime preventing you from not using a seat-belt. In all but the "nanny-ist" of states they can't even pull you over for it (but they may be able to tack on a $50 fine or something if they see you not wearing it when they pull you over). You can even buy clips that plug into the seat belt latch that make it think it's buckled when it's not.

Mandating that seat belts be available in vehicles for those that choose to use them and making it annoying to not do so is a far cry from banning an entire category of product.
Another Interstellar Object Detected in the Solar System
Correction, liquid water WAS on planet 110 years ago. :)
Goldman Sachs isn't profitable because of prop trading. They charge fees for services. It's that simple.
Yeah, in general I find people to be excessive with their spending. $5k a month sounds like an insane waste to me. I'm pretty thrifty. I feel like tech workers are living in a different world than me.

My direct deposit income is something like $2400 every two weeks. That's after my IRA investments, monthly health insurance cost, metro card cost through my job, etc. I work at Columbia University, by the way.

I live in a rent stabilized 1br apartment in west Harlem: $1500/mo rent. After that I have no major expenses other than food, and I shop at local grocery stores and cook at home a lot. I make my own bread, because I like to, not because I have to. I always feel like I have more than enough money. I put around $800 a month into savings and investments.

I'm even able to travel frequently to Europe, Latin America, and to see my parents in Seattle. I agree with Bradley Kuhn on this one: in general, tech workers are wayyy overpaid.
Flavored e-cigarette cartridges (or whatever they're called, I don't smoke) are a tobacco product.
I think you're willfully ignoring the bulk of my comment.
Many of the costs you list are invisible or avoidable if you don't care about consequences: Vehicle depreciation is invisible. Maintenance costs will hit later. If you haven't heard (or don't care) about the insurance thing, you just don't do it, so zero expense (until you're in an accident).

Once you ignore these costs, and only do "income - fuel", Uber pays "really well". And you can do it at any time, as you wish! Little effort! Own boss!

It's not surprising that Uber finds people to drive for them. Not everyone realizes the hidden costs.

Although there are apparently some who seem to understand them, know how to play the optimization game, and (think that they) make enough that it's worth it. I have no way of checking, of course.
There's a very strong drive to make an equivalency with tobacco and e-cigarettes, and I think it's extremely irresponsible.

"We don't know the long-term effects" is usually put forward as an argument. However, preliminary evidence is pretty strong that they're orders of magnitude less harmful.

Putting e-cigarettes, (which look like they might save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives if all smokers switched to them) in line with cigarettes is potentially a public health catastrophe.
Steem is such a cool project. That's definitely high up on the priority list for us to support!
Well, to the best of my understanding, both are an issue with current colliders. I've not read any of the papers around the idea of observing collisions caused by high energy events elsewhere in the galaxy/universe, but the articles I read made it sound like this would solve a portion of the problem that we otherwise might not be able to without a solar system sized collider. They didn't make it sound like this would be anything we could do anytime soon, however. But potentially sooner than we'd be able to generate the energy needed to cause collisions at those energy levels.

I'm having trouble finding the articles I've read on the subject - I'll follow back up if I do manage to find 'em.
This article has a lot of arguments specifically about safety. And even then, unions can increase safety in some domain, while simultaneously decrease safety in other domain and bankrupt host airline.

Moreover, Sully, as senior pilot, was direct benefactor of the union system that exploits younger pilots, so his opinions should be scrutinized first of all.
A lot of larger private companies pay in RSUs, which only vest after a liquidity event happens (ex. IPO, acquisition etc.), so you don't pay tax until the stock is liquid, and you are able to sell it.
What a bunch of bullshit.

>The end goal is a self driving car, and the resulting concentration of wealth.

That was the end goal no matter what regulations were put in place. You are really trying to argue the only reason for automation is because they might have to, I don't know, provide healthcare to employees and give them some time off?

> which is why they have taken the typical response to government over-regulation -- automation

I just cannot believe you are trying to relate the two. Automation is simply the most efficient model for everyone involved. It has virtually nothing to do with regulations. Could the fear of regulations push them a bit faster toward automation? Maybe- but your trying to argue that progressive policies are pushing the jobs out of workers is basically Trump level psycho.
There's a classic one where one places a classified ad that says: "How to make money at home! Send XXX $10 for information."

Send them $10, and you get a letter that says: "Place a classified ad that says: How to make money at home! Send XXX $10 for information."
Most of them never solved it they just did "good enough" and haven't had any issues. Most people are open to solving things without involving the government or just drop the issue and walk away. Everything will be fine for until they get someone who's not ok with it then they get raked over the coals for what they thought was "good enough".
I think it is entirely reasonable that the government ban chemically addictive products which attract use by children.
It's an auction - they used to make great money because there were fewer drivers. If drivers walked away when pay got too low, the pay would rise to equalize with rider demand.
It's never an either/or. you're presenting a false dilemma.
you can decide not to buy corporate products

That's a fallacy by both choice and externality.

There are cases in which there is no choice but to use specific corporate products, or in which choices are made without an individual's consent or involvement.

Karen Sandler, co-host (with former FSF directory Bradley Kuhn) of the "Free as in Freedom" podcast has an implanted, closed-source proprietary medical device. She can literally chose between non-free software (which includes surveillance), or death.

https://sfconservancy.org/news/2018/mar/26/sandler-fsf-free-...

Emergency medical services, government contracts, third-party contracts by various firms and organisations, third-party use of Gmail either directly or as a hosted email service (see Benjamin Mako Hill's "Google has most of my email because it has all of yours": https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/google-has-most-of-my-email-be...), and the issues of spillover externalities (Amazon Ring doorbell surveillance, third-party tracking of mobile phone SIMs, MACs, and Bluetooth signatures, facial surveillance) mean that, no, actually, you cannot decide not to participate in corporate surveillance.

And, as a final point, both government and corporate surveillance and oppression very often speak to the same underlying dynamic: that of power to defend both itself and its wealth and/or golden geese. Examples are numerous, though the Johnson County War would be a good case history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_County_War

Let's please put this canard in its well-deserved grave and bury it.
When are we banning fast food?
Understanding Big O and Algorithmic Complexity
Typically this withholding is not sufficient, as it's done at bonus rates, which is less than your marginal. You can always elect to withhold more base salary though.
It is LinkedIn, and no Netflix because they don't do new grad.

Might make more sense to change it to FLAAG
This is interesting. Does anyone have further reading to recommend about this?
I wonder why they didn’t just put a minimum rate for contracting work? That would put all qualified workers above it.

Just say “you can hire someone to gig for an hour all you want but you need to pay $50/h”.
It's definitely genetic in my case. My mum and two of her three siblings have it, as did their grandmother. Family dinners often end with half the people round the table falling asleep, and our spouses telling sleep-related anecdotes.
“Fight Club” presaged the darker corners of the internet
Nice site and solution. I clicked 'run' on the Examples page and at first I thought it was broken but then after about 20s it produced output--might want to drop some initial output that tells users to wait or something.
If anything, the bay area numbers seem on the low side to me.
Why is it abhorrent to not have your own kids? There's plenty of them already that need families if you want to scratch that itch.

Plus you can solve climate change AND road traffic!
And we can witness the success of that program every time we watch mainstream media. They got really scared of Trump and decided they can't afford to hide the hidden hand any longer, so now we have more than obvious identical talking points being parroted by "journalists" and "experts".
Could you guys tell me why you think your salary is low? I don't quite get it how you can compare expensive living areas to no so expensive ones.

In Europe compared to US you have many preferences where you don't have to pay from your own pocket for: medicine, vacation time, retirement, education, social security and so on. Real estate price is also mush higher in expensive areas. Taxes are higher but you have all those nice benefits.
I know you meant it as a general statement, but I think it depends on the kind of noise, and obviously the type of signal. Its trivial for a computer to look past 'fixed pattern noise' to find the data in an audio-visual signal. For certain noisy signals, a compute device could amplify/scale the data (and then perform noise removal) to retrieve the signal, etc, etc..
>Why do people keep posting this tired argument over and over?

Sour grapes. Easier to pretend _nobody_ beats the market than honestly admit you're not willing to put in the effort to constantly discover new alpha. And it's fine to not be willing to do that -- it takes a lot of effort and skill to discover alpha and most people will be better off improving their skills in their day job and just tracking indexes.

Doesn't mean it's impossible to beat the market, especially as a small investor where you have some advantages over larger players (your orders aren't large enough to move markets and reveal valuable information)
That's not true worldwide. Booster seats are illegal in Europe, you need a full car seat for children up to 35 kg.
That seems optimistic.
It pretty clearly means that the amount of food produced every day is the amount of food that 9B people consume every day.

Market forces will cause the types of food produced to be diverse enough to consist of a sane and reasonable approximation of a healthy diet, so I don't think that counterarguments along the lines of "we can feed 9B people if you think living off corn counts as feeding" apply here.

Modern agriculture is incredibly efficient. I am completely sure that if our modern techniques were fully implemented across the developing world, we would be able to feed another 4B people with ease.
You were under the correct impression. In "wealthy" countries, we throw enough food out to feed the world many times over. In not even trying to feed those we have just cast aside, we have still produced enough food. But we're not going to just give people food, that would be left wing extremism and that's wrong.
Infinite scrolling in Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Reddit doesn't exist to improve the user experience, but to make these sites addictive. Different priorities here.
Love it. With the beepers texting on early phones
What's the Truth with Badger Culling?
>The US public does not want this

Yes, they do.
Show HN: A Free 3rd Party API Status Dashboard
This could be stopped easily by making cell phone companies liable

> Criminals have learned how to persuade mobile phone providers like T-Mobile and AT&T to switch a phone number to a new device that is under their control.

> Hackers can get the codes by bribing phone company employees.

How hard is it to insist on someone coming down to a store and submit several forms of identification to get a new SIM? And make multiple people in the store sign off on it. Has anyone ever gone to jail for taking a bribe to swap a SIM?

The other issue is to stop using SMS for a 1-factor recovery. There still needs to be a second factor, like knowing a password or a pin.
Amazon has an office in Detroit with 100s of SDEs.
End-to-End Kubernetes Workflow with Garden and Terraform
I've gotten signing bonus from recruiters trying to close a deal at non FAANG. Not $100k signing bonuses but 4 and 5 figure for sure.
I'd disagree that nothing has changed. Consciousness of the fact that mass surveillance is happening is much more widespread, and gets brought up in passing from time to time. People have changed their behaviour somewhat - eg many now try to use encrypted communications quite consciously and even Signal has become quite popular for example. It's influence thinking over e.g. use of facial recognition cameras in public places which is unpopular.

And whilst what eg GCHQ actually do hasn't really changed much as far as I can tell, it's been brought onto an "open" legal footing which is progress. The next step will be for the legal safeguards which are currently rather toothless to evolve to have real teeth. I think that will happen eventually but it'll be a slow journey to get there.
Can't you add a number, verify the account, then delete the number?
So, you prefer the tactics of a Brave New World over 1984.

The outcome is still the same though is it not? You’re not really in control of anything.
WhatsApp accounts can only be used from one device simultaneously.
Man, Econ really is the miserable science. "I started with a politically charged theory passed down from The Elders and, after 6 years of being paid to search for evidence of that theory, guess what, I found some".

For starters, using patents as a proxy for innovation is dubious at best. Patents are a terrible proxy for innovation. My own experience has been the inverse: organizations/individuals that patenting shit lots of shit are consistently the least inventive. Not sure if this was true in the early 20th century, but it certainly is today.
Presumably this means the new "malicious vehicle barriers" on the bridges will soon have killed more people than the terror attacks they are "preventing repeats" of.

Apparently post-9/11 security theatre pushed so many people out of planes and into long distance driving that the additional road deaths overtook the 9/11 death toll in a few months.
Haha, I invested in the "shovel" companies that were making real profits (such as Cisco). They got caught in the secondary die-off, when the dot-bust companies stopped buying shovels.