skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks! I've already replied to the original e-mail and will let your colleagues deal with it; if I don't get any reply I'll get back to you directly.

To clarify, I have never explicitly requested "not getting more email from you" (in fact I'm sure the unsubscribe link works fine), I just haven't opted into any e-mail in the first place besides it being mandatory to provide an e-mail address when donating, but I didn't expect it would be kept for anything other than the receipt and any legal obligations. It's most likely against the GDPR as well if you think your organisation falls under the regulation.

So my problem is less about unsubscribing from the list and more about why I was on the list in the first place which is the only reason I'm making a big deal about it.
The explanation makes it sound as if the author of one of these tweet threads can start working on one but leave it in some unfinished state until such time when the author can publish it all at once. If that's the case then I can kind of understand the medium although I still think a blog post is a better fit.
Not so much the Steam users, but I would hope that developers would have enough knowledge to add their project and build directories to the anti-virus on-scan exclusions.

As with any security, it's a balance against convenience/speed.
> This Economist article points out some of the many small academic works that quibble over details with Piketty and Saez. But that's not anything new

These are not nitpicks. What you measure drastically changes the results. Piketty and Saez presented their own revision to their data in 2018 that shows starkly different results than the 2013 data everyone cites: http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PSZ2018QJE.pdf

For example figure 3 shows that when you account for tax transfers, the bottom 50%’s share of income is only a few points lower than in 1960, though significantly lower than the peak of about 25% in 1970. It also shows that, contrary to common assertions, the bottom 50% income has grown consistently since 1960 adjusted for inflation. Figure 1 shows that the labor share of income has been flat since 1940 when you account for benefits. (Put another way, capital’s share of income is flat.)

The data about returns to capital are particularly important. Supporters of wealth taxes and capital taxes tend to point to rising inequality as the justification for such approaches. But if the returns to capital aren’t increasing as a fraction of the economy, that argument gets harder. Of course there may be other arguments in favor of such taxes, but those seem less well developed.

The point the Economist article makes well is that inequality is hard to measure, and the simple definition used by Piketty and Saez’s initial analysis is inadequate. For example, there is a whole school of libertarian thought that, even if you believe the government should be in the business of redistribution, the best approach is to maximize growth through a free, deregulated economy and then tax individual incomes to provide generous welfare benefits. Most of the developed world has moved in that direction over the last 30 years. Under Piketty and Saez’s 2013 model, which excludes tax transfers, you can’t accurately describe inequality in a country that uses such a model.

Moreover, there are additional analyses showing that, when you look at consumption rather than income (which accounts for both tax transfers and falling prices from globalization) inequality is basically unchanged since the 1970s: https://voxeu.org/article/consumption-and-income-inequality-.... That is to say, the bottom 10% get to consume about the same fraction of total production as they did half a century ago. Of course there are downsides to consumption measures too, insofar as the data is sparser for incomes at the top. (The measure above includes money spent on mortgages for mansions, but not private yachts, for example.)

But just because something is easy to measure (pre-tax income) doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to measure!
> One interest rate is set by the Fed, which serves as a benchmark for other market rates.

This used to be true, but lately CBs are also buying bonds. That affects their supply/demand balance, which affects their price, which is another way of expressing the interest rate.

Source: spent time trading bonds.
> These guys are far less likely to crash then someone on their cellphones.

Yes, that is also dangerous and anti-social, but I don't see how it makes what they did less dangerous.

It's dangerous not because they're bad drivers, they're not, it's because no one else is expecting a car to come barreling up from behind them at 120mph.

And yes, thankfully no one has been hurt yet, but it's a totally unnecessary risk for some silly record.
Suspected, it seems. Direct contact with Julian Assange.
Biometric Technology: Should We Be Worried?
Roleplaying Difficult Conversations
Plex launches a free, ad-supported streaming service in over 200 countries
Posts complaining about downvoting are boring.
Somewhat related: I want Location Services on when navigating and off at almost all other times.

Why isn't there a control I can put in control center to toggle Location Services? Instead it takes 4-5 actions to do this. I was hoping Shortcuts would make this possible, but no. It's almost as if Apple wants to make it difficult...
Can't imagine it would be.

If you were a member of say, the Utah State Police, and you saw this article, what would you do? Ok, a photo claims these guys drove cross-country averaging 103mph with a top speed of 193mph. Can you prove they didn't slow down to the speed limit while they were in Utah and only drove incredibly fast in the other states? Also, which one of these guys was actually driving while they were in Utah?

I believe the police would have to cite a specific individual for driving at an illegal speed at a specific location within their jurisdiction. Sort of like how everybody new Al Capone was a mob boss, but it was a struggle to actually charge him with a specific crime.
Your 2nd link mentioned velocity raptor, which I've just watched on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6yWXppfsAo

Interesting.... Not that relativity makes a whit of sense anyway, but that's an intriguing video (edit: wouldn't want to play it though)
All ISPs have privacy policies. 99% of all privacy policies are either copy/pasted from elsewhere or written in legalese so that company can do whatever they want. 'Internal business use' is a nice fodder for 'Selling data to increase this general ledger account for later business use.'

An audit is almost always under bad pretenses. If I spend $$$ on an audit company, the company itself has bias.

The difference between third-party audits and government issued audits (think food safety) is that the government has nothing to gain by a positive, or negative result.

IANAL, just cynical of people.
> Whistle blower and journalist legal protection

Just generalize privacy and data protection here to everyone. Restricting protections to certain groups is a massive strategic mistake for any form of civil liberty.
they are a tech giantt already. There's no difference
You're both right. The Fed is a lender (to banks only) and carries out what they call "open-market operations" with the goal of enacting policy and not making money. They throw around enough money to skew the market.
It's a completely needless long journey, in an uneconomical vehicle. The impact of one single person may be negligible but it's precisely this sort of collective tragedy of the commons approach that is proving problematic in regards pollution.
In the US at least they're still still taxed for capital gains, but the capital gains tax doesn't account for inflation. So if there's 2% inflation that causes the value of your stocks to rise by 2%, that is taxed as a capital gain, so in real teams you have less money afterwards. Non-inflation-adjusted capital gains tax is essentially a wealth tax.
You are asserting that there is broad academic agreement that Piketty's major points still stand, but that is far from true -- in fact they never stood under serious scrutiny at all. Outside of simply describing tautalogies, his major point is that inequality is rising because the rate of return on capital is exceeding the economy's growth rate, from which he makes a logical leap that inequality will increase inexorably without intervention. This point fails to consider that people spend some (and sometimes a lot) of their earnings from capital, which dissipates their wealth back into the economy. Historical data show that wealth does not end up growing faster than income because of the effect of spending the wealth (you have to spend basically none of it to maintain a growth rate that is greater than GDP). A good number of serious academics have raised this and other points. His book is best understood as a popular argument for specific political ends, and since it gives a veneer of academic seriousness to those ends it has been popular.
AI Decodes Speech and Hearing Based on Brain Activity
Thrush nightingales practice singing in winter for summer breeding season
You still get punished for it... That's the whole argument. Even it's an accident, it's not the same kind of accident as turning a corner and spilling coffee on them.
I think a hardware chip would solve ‘crown jewels’ theft (eg I get rekt but at least my SSH key isn’t stolen for good), but there isn’t much you can’t do to my host if you have root, persistence and patience.

Yubikeys are silly and designed to sell rather than solve a problem effectively, IMO.
Meanwhile, Windy's maps use OpenStreetMap data, but don't give OSM the required attribution.

That's against OSM's licence and seriously not cool.
This is kind of a touchy subject. I feel like a lot of people would balk at the idea of the top 1% not doing better and better, not because they have any extra insight into the topic but because to say this seems like you're defending the ultra-rich (and by extension attacking everyone else). In reality, even if the rich aren't getting even richer at quite the rate we thought, it doesn't mean you really need to have any more sympathy for them, it just means you tweak a few lines of your rhetoric.
If inflation causes the nominal value of your hotel chain to increase 2%, you have to pay capital gains tax on this nominal gain (at least in countries where capital gains tax is not adjusted for inflation), leaving you with less real value afterwards.
Loudwire — Wikipeda: Fact or Fiction? https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvXmarOi5xICV0X4HfMH7S29E...
Is it really just the elderly that the US throws under the bus? Does the US value anybody who can't or won't make rich people even richer?
Qubes OS already exists! It's been perfectly usable for more than a decade now. It can't be recommended enough: https://www.qubes-os.org/

Sadly "modern security awareness" doesn't seem to really amount to anything, and existing solutions go unused. %90 of this "malware library" problem too would have been avoided if package repositories just required all packages to be signed with keys on hardware dongles. Ruby and python and some others at least have the excuse of inertia, but it's pretty cynical of everything else to not require signing already, when the added friction is nothing relative to the effort of writing software worth publishing.
All good suggestions. Also – the Martinez cocktail is another great initiation to gin, and my favorite of all cocktails. It's my goto benchmark drink as well, I've never been to a good bar that messed up my Martinez.
When I was in grad school, my trip home for breaks was 720 miles routinely driven in 12 hours, all stops included, for an average of 60mph. About 5 miles of this entire trip was on non-interstate, and travelling through the cities could be arranged to miss all the rush hours, which means that you can maintain speed limit the entire freeway trip (which is mostly 70mph).
Not to mention that Piketty has a relatively soft list of proposals and research compared to the 'old guard' of critics of capital. The Economist's arguments against Piketty are only there because he's the most radical economist on capital's horizon. By presenting Piketty as radical on the issue of inequality, the arguments from modern, radical economists on every other aspect of capital are shut out. For example, beyond Piketty we have John Roemer, beyond Roemer we have Veneziani & Yoshihara, beyond them we have Fred Moseley, Andrew Kliman, Sekine, Itoh...

In other words, Piketty gets so much criticism because he's the least radical of a bunch of radical economists, and because of that, he hasn't left capital's horizon.
Nowadays, sure. What he said has been consumed, digested, and recycled. Google encrypted the attack vector Five Eyes used to harvest user traffic.

The why is the only thing left to talk about.
That's the reason it's 80, not 81 or 78. But a width near there is right for readability.
The no setuid shell scripts rule on Linux was an early attempt to deal with this.

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/364/allow-setuid-on...
I've had mixed success subbing Montenegro Amaro or Fernet for Campari.

Very different flavors, though, and the type of "aromatized wine" (aka vermouth) will have an impact.
5G won’t change everything, or at least probably not your things
With the beautifully named Unblock Ticket Request System.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Unblock_Ticket_Reque...
China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'
Wow the reviews are night and day between Google and iOS.
You are really insulting. If you want to remove my comment, remove my comment. Don’t sit there and make up crap about it. Please tell me how it’s an emotional statement and not purely objective unless you wanna hide your head in the sand from the horrific things China has done and is continuing to do.

Edit: seems you can't even follow your own rules, both for insulting me and "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did." So is my comment egregious and shouldn't be replied to, or is it fine??
>Real mining seemed to work okay in past.

For the purpose of "creating money", it's a waste of resources.

>American GDP grew faster in the 1800s under the gold standard (avg. 4%+)

I don't want to go back to that period.
And your method of getting them out of “shit situations” is not by showing them how to do it correctly - it’s by moving them to something you know.

So now, the same people who don’t have the expertise to manage a colo, are now going all of the sudden have the expertise to manage VMs and open source alternatives and know how to manage a fault tolerant multi region database and other HA setups at multiple colos?

Again, how much experience do you personally have with actually using cloud services from the big three? I’ve done both, I had to. The cloud vendors didn’t exist when I started. Heck we had a “server room” with raised floors for our “massive” 2TB SAN.
Some "easy" tools:

1. Ban libraries that have names that might confused with others (so no I where L is etc).

2. Only use libraries that have been around for over 1 year (you're relying on the community to debug them).

I think with these two alone you might get rid of most issues. The problem is that someone might buy an old, trusted name and then inject malicious code. I don't know of a technical way to enforce change of ownership that might be useful and not too much work. Alternatively a nefarious player might release useful code, bide their time to get a reputation, and then inject malicious code.

Short Life VMs are a good idea but sometimes you want them all to talk to each other.
Just write a bad book and learn from it
I think generally, people do hate both, though neither as much as Twitter.

Personally I feel most strongly about Google, because I really believed the marketing back in the day. Took me a long time to get disillusioned, and when I did I felt all the worse for having been a supporter for so long.
Yeah, the extra dry martini thing is silly. You can just say you want a glass of gin.
If there’s any electronic music fans out there, I highly recommend checking https://di.fm out. They have a ton of different channels and you can listen for free. It’s great music for long coding sessions. Just FYI, the app only works with a premium subscription as it is a third-party app.
No, and there's not a strong historical basis for making the distinction, either - in the UK, the hop and grain bills for beers sold as IPAs have been in a constant state of flux for centuries now, and it wasn't all that long ago that an IPA coming from a London brewery could have been more bitter than a standard American IPA nowadays.

If it's any consolation, at least in the classification system used by the BJCP style guidelines, they aren't even in the same general category. But one could argue that the names used in a beer judging rubric and the names used for the purposes of marketing beer are not, despite the use of some common language, the same thing.

It's also, I think, not quite correct to blame the development of American IPA solely on machismo. That's undeniably a big part of it nowadays, but, when the style developed, it was much more about adapting the basic idea of an English IPA to taste good using the grain and hops that were being grown in North America.

For a good (mostly British-focused) blog that covers some of this history in excruciating details, see Shut Up About Barclay Perkins.
First, you didn't answer my question. You may find the abstract idea of a Wikipedia that is perpetually endowed comforting, but you didn't actually describe a scenario where it was well functioning but ran out of money. I think the far-fetched-ness of such scenarios makes that abstract idea less enticing.

Second, the hoarding worry with charities still applies to those with limited possible scope. The idea is that such charities should not acquire perpetual funds because they become unaccountable; this doesn't rely on there always being more available orphans.

Third, why did you limit things to Wikipedia and Wiktionary? There are a bunch of other similar projects, extant and hypothetical, that the WMF would arguably be the best organization to run.
I agree, it's no where near bulletproof, but it's about raising barriers as well as updating the tool once workarounds are found. I don't see an easy solution to this issue but in most of the cases (including the ones in this article) I've seen to date, a simple URL scan would've caught them let alone more complex methods.
>Jokes aside, the only "connection" Bean has with that inquiry is one of association: not with Russia or Trump; but with WikiLeaks & Julian Assange.

I'm not sure I understand this sentence, Wikileaks, Julian Assange, Russia, and Trump would all be very clearly part of an investigation into whether Trump's campaign sought a foreign government's help in influencing a presidential election.

Am I missing something? I have no idea who this person on Twitter is or what their connection is with Wikileaks or Assange, i.e. did they donate once to Wikileaks in which case this seems crazy, or are they much more involved and thus their Google data would reasonably be included in any investigation into the matter? But it seems quite reasonable that if the latter is true that their data would be pulled for the Mueller investigation.
"I think this power of defining truth is one of the major battlefields of the 21st century." - That's a really interesting idea.

Isn't truth truth by its definition?
A lot of places in America serve room temperature non melted martinis. Pretty horrible.
If I were presented with the task, I would first draw a tilted water line to figure out what the "halfway filled" amount looks like. Then I would "undo" the tilt, taking care to keep the represented amount of water the same. It could be that women are simply being more methodical in their approach.
Preadaptation: Fossil reveals new pattern in mammalian middle ear evolution
Implementing a Service with the Debian Package on Raspberry Pi
Yeah I really wish I had more insight into how this actually works, how many people in google work on these info-boxes, where do they get their data from (plundering existing sites it seems). It's weird to me that google is so cheap. If they want the data so bad why don't they buy Genius or setup an equivalent, or train some AI to extract song lyrics from songs. The amount of brainpower working at google is huge but the output is often quite disappointing, I guess the scale at which they operate is impressive but the results not so much.
What's the cost of reading, correcting, and creating pull requests for 6943 bugs vs `apt-get update && apt-get upgrade`?
All the better, when they do monitor him and spend time cracking his shopping list is less time and resources against the everyone else
Does anyone know where this was officially announced? I don't see anything at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/security-announce@pyth...
When I see any software updating its dependencies or an app store I think the security battle is lost. It's very easy for any gov intelligence agency to seize an abandoned software and start to use it to distribute spyware.
Measuring income inequality in the US without looking at outsized wage gains abroad feels remarkably inaccurate.

I'll copy-paste my reply to another thread from earlier this year:

> But, wages haven't improved in the last 40 years for the average person

...in the US.

Growing inequality in the US is driven by the fact that capital gains domestically have improved dramatically alongside wage gains abroad, while wage has been essentially stagnant within the US due to globalization / offshoring / outsourcing

The solution, in my humble immigrant opinion, is to train Americans to take on service jobs that cannot be easily automated / performed by cheap labor overseas. But that requires taking an honest look at the country's education system and neither side of the aisle seems to be able to do that without resorting to anger and vitriol
Password Management for a More Civilized Age
The Philosophy of SimCity: An Interview with the Game's Lead Designer
Did we read the same article ?

EDIT :

> As Tim Wu pointed out in a 2003 law review article, what usually becomes of these battles—what happened with piano rolls, with records, with radio, and with cable—isn’t that copyright holders squash the new technology. Instead, they cut a deal and start making money from it.

[...]

> now, in 2011, there was a plan—a plan that seemed to work equally well for everyone at the table

[...]

> DOJ’s intervention likely spelled the end of the settlement agreement. No one is quite sure why the DOJ decided to take a stand instead of remaining neutral. Dan Clancy, the Google engineering lead on the project who helped design the settlement, thinks that it was a particular brand of objector—not Google’s competitors but “sympathetic entities” you’d think would be in favor of it, like library enthusiasts, academic authors, and so on—that ultimately flipped the DOJ.
> American GDP grew faster in the 1800s under the gold standard (avg. 4%+) than any time after the creation of the federal reserve.

Yes... during industrialization. Basically all countries experience rapid GDP growth during their industrialization. Even developing countries today get 4%+ GDP growth. Look at China's GDP growth in the last 50 years for a recent example.
I would rather focus on reducing absolute poverty than reducing inequality (gini-coefficient).
Adding to the fun, swap out olives for a cocktail onion and you have yourself a Gibson.
In a lawsuit, the fees can be added to the damages.
We essentially have that, they're stored in NPM, and it's horrible.

It turns out when you can package snippets you use so many you can't possibly keep track and audit them all.

Just look at the Left-pad thing, or the event-stream thing.