skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel that a lot of the blame heaped upon the finance industry is unnecessarily antagonistic (and personal).

The problem, at the core, appears to be one of misaligned incentives meeting societal level trust.

Do you blame the fox for eating your chickens, when you yourself placed him in the coop, to protect them from marauding wolves? Or should you blame yourself for foolishly trusting a fox with your chickens?

It is all well and good to blame the "evil" finance guys for all your problems. But it is much too simple a solution.

We, as a society, have given these people the power to do such damage at such scale to incredibly important societal systems. We must design our systems such that we never entrust anyone with the ability to manipulate public common systems (markets/government). This is because no matter how "noble" people say they are (they may be sincere!) - abuse will inevitably become rampant - it is human nature. This is also why communism/Marxism and libertarianism can't work in reality.

> Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

We need to stop trusting people - period. This is why, at least in the US, we have 3 branches of government, so that each one will check the other out of self-interest and balance possible abuse/corruption (not perfect - but pretty darn good!).

An easy fix would be to require all big traders in any market to not have a sell-side department at all - the Chinese Wall in financial institutions is a complete farce (as a cynic once told me: If it can be exploited - it will be exploited).

Other examples would be to have all trades rate limited that they can't lock up the market at any one point in time - similar to DDOS measures used by websites (click too many times and you just gotta wait). You shouldn't be able to dump a $4 billion short position on the futures market over just one second, let alone over an hour. You must rate limit entry and exit of trades so that we can smooth market dislocations and reduce the thundering herd problem found in extreme volatility.

Anyone else got suggestions?
I think it might be 550 nowadays (I think I got it at that mark a couple of months ago)
This seems like a bad idea, since at small font sizes it will be a similar shape to the up-triangle, especially in fonts which (mostly) fill it in.
Whether your site gets owned or not is dominated by its popularity rather than its source code license. There's a number of proprietary forums out there too, they tend to suck as much as the open variants. (And if it's for sale, your attacker has a copy.) Being custom-developed protects you from the script kiddies (but you'll have to fight spam yourself--fortunately custom non-OCR-requiring captchas can have higher blocking success rates than even recaptcha), being closed gives you little more than a time advantage if you do become popular. Security through obscurity is a real security layer, it's just incredibly thin.

The better argument for "roll your own", if you have the time, is that it can be a great learning experience. But regardless of what's used, if you ever do get popular enough to become a conscious target it's just negligent to not do security audits from people whose job is security. It's also helpful to design from the perspective of "everything is compromised, what will I regret."
Citing laws is always a weak tactic when trying to make an argument about whether a certain thing is right or wrong. All laws are just arbitrary strings of words on paper. If you seriously want to go deep on the ethics or appropriateness of any human phenomenon you really really don't want to fallback to citing laws. Because for every good/smart/reasonable law you can cite, we can find a dozen others which any reasonable person would say are unethical, ludicrous, ignorant or anachronistic. A bit like all the high and mighty language espoused by the US founders about how all men are created equal, about truth, justice, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, etc. Unless you were a woman, black, a slave, or not a land-owner. Or lived in Hawaii. Or Mexico. Or the Phillipines. Or were a Native American. A laborer in a union. A homosexual, etc. So the real question, I hope, that we should always be focused on is, not whether something is "merely" legal or illegal -- per some arbitrary jurisdiction's legal framework, at some arbitrary moment in time -- but rather on whether a reasonable, educated, experienced, intelligent, wise adult human would think about it, today, at this moment, giving objective criteria and similar goals, and with all relevant details and particulars taken into account, etc. If I'm arguing with somebody on the Internet about whether a horse is actually and truly a sea squid or not, you can't argue against me by saying, "This legal document here in France clearly says that a horse is a squid!". Because if that horse does not look or act in my eyes anything like a squid, and vice versa, then I'm going to be standing on much stronger ground when I say, "A horse is a horse, not a squid. They are nothing like each other. One runs around on the ground, has four legs, eats grass, etc. The other has tentacles, is squishy, swims around under the sea, and likes Justin Bieber music." And my case is stronger. The "b-b-b-but it says in this book here that a horse is a squid!" carries little weight, or rather, it should carry little weight when we're trying to have a deeper discussion, a more objective discussion. Whether thing A is more like B, or more like C.

Related: anal sex is a crime in many jurisdictions. Having sex outside of marriage is a crime -- unless you're a man -- in some jurisdictions. If a 17 year old and a 21 year old both have sex together, mutually consensually there are, I'm sure, some legal jurisdictions that claim that the 17 year old cannot give consent and therefore it was non-consensual, and therefore it was a kind of rape, and therefore that 21 year old will now have very bad legal and physical things happen to him/her, including a felony record, prison time, community ostracization, etc. Isn't that paradoxical and a travesty? "A horse is a squid." Unless in actual reality, it is not. Reality > laws.
Awesome troll, dude. What's wrong with being 'sexy'?
I have downvote in this thread but not always. I find the removal of edit, reply and voting privelege at seemingly arbitrary conditions to be very annoying.
No it suggested making physical units actually get rendered at the size they describe. It didn't specify an implementation.
It isn't surprising that IE still sucks. In part, it sucks for the same reason that Safari sucks, which is updates (or lack thereof). Google Chrome, when it was first released, was a crappy browser with an excellent update and installation infrastructure. But that's not the whole story.

All the little tweaks that have gone into Chrome have been through two versions of public testing in Chromium and other varieties, and they are mature. Even better, they come from an open-source ecosystem, where innovations aren't driven by corporate needs. Google Chrome absolutely sucks for some corporate applications, in some really simple areas.

Try slip printing from Google Chrome. It won't work. Internet Explorer on the other hand isn't just a browser, it's an infrastructure. One that is tightly integrated into the OS and where you can override everything. In the mid-2000s, one didn't see a lot of alternatives to either Firefox or Firefox, but the number of alternative shells to IE, some of which were even popular, were overwhelming. More than that, an incredible number of applications actually had IE running underneath, for whatever reasons. Usually to display information, such as a help browser, or to provide some way of integrating one's application with the WWW.

And that is the problem with Internet Explorer. It was never designed for add-ons. It was designed to be an add-on. It was never designed to be updated, it was designed to be integrated. It was never designed to have excellent JavaScript, it was designed to have excellent integration into things like DirectX and even AJAX.

There is a reason that IE was ahead, and still is in many ways. IE doesn't suck considering what it is. It may suck for the thing it says on the tin that it's being used for, but there's no reason not to use Chrome for web browsing. Internet Explorer may be a sucky browser, but it's some pretty good infrastructure as it happens. IE is plumbing, Chrome is something else entirely. And IE happens to be the only kind of plumbing out there in the real marketplace. It may be a curse, but there is no better alternative for many of the things it can do.
The UX of HTML5
The foremost cause of sexism is the fact that many males (consciously or subconsciously) perceive women as mentally and physically weaker (and indeed the average woman is physically weaker than the average male, that's just the way nature played the cards for the human species).

This needs to be called out. What is the basis for this statement? All over this thread you have been constructing arguments based on assertions, all which are substantiated entirely by your sheer ability to proclaim things. How do you know what the foremost cause of sexism is, and where are you getting this knowledge? Is it more of your opinion?

Any argument can be forwarded when you have access to a set of private and convenient facts.
If you are really interested in the text, use the inspector, navigate to the #content div and then you can toggle the text-shadow on and off. I hope this helped!
Haha, I was just thinking the same thing today. There are two voices I have to listen to here.

Hacker: Scratch your itch, build something!

Freelancer: That itch will cost you money! You could be working during that time.

Compromise: Build something on the side (rather than client work) which will bring in cash. This is good for me because it diversifies my income.
Fireside Chat with Elon Musk
I stopped after few words. This is unreadable.
Formula One Legend Murray Sets Course for Energy-Efficient Car Design
The problem with building something on the side that makes money is that most of the time it still means you need to spend time promoting it.
This is why iReader is my favorite Chrome extension by far: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ppelffpjgkifjfgnba...
500 karma according to this infrequently-updated FAQ: http://jacquesmattheij.com/The+Unofficial+HN+FAQ#karma
Writing a flippable book using CSS Regions and 3D transforms
> Men are a little smarter than women on average, and the male IQ distribution has a higher SD

No. The higher SD means that men's IQs are spread over a bigger range - there are more brilliant men than women, and also more moronic men than women. Average it out and it's the same.
Taking the long view on API ecosystems - It's the Business Model Stupid
Do you know why someone would use fixed-point instead of float? Faster. Used to be much much faster.

I'll bet you're still confused. Did you know since 1992, every x86 has had hardware float support? And did you know that hardware float is slower than fixed-point float?

Suppose you have money in US dollars and you use an integer to store pennies. That's an example of fixed-point. You're so retarded you don't know a double takes more time than an int!

Ohhh! You still believe GPU is unnecessary. You're being foolish -- they would not have GPU's if they weren't needed.

Pointing-out x87 floating coprocessors have been standard since 1992 was to show how incompetant you are and has nothing to do with other CPU's.
♥ and 💩 have a nice symmetry.
ExtJS 4 – Splash Screen
Two Thirds of New Mobile Buyers Now Opting For Smartphones
The product here is not the interface it's the social network - the people - and interactions that enables.

There is much to improve (page titles, semantic urls, recording of moderator edits, ...) but none of that is likely unless a sufficient quora of top contributors force the issue or decide to move (r/hackernews anyone!?). That in turn is unlikely because of the association with pg and ycombinator.

That's my take.
I'd up vote you 100 times if I could.

I am quite unsuccessful with women, but the women friends I have that have tried to give me advice tell me the same thing. It is my job to make the first move, plan a date and pay.

I have never once got any useful advice on how to tell if a girl is actually interested though. Apparently I am supposed to potentially harass women until I get lucky!? I don't know.

I don't think it is right to make someone else feel harassed cause I misinterpret friendliness as romantic interest. So I almost never ask girls out. The few times I have I was mostly wrong. It's very depressing.

Rightly or wrongly, I think most guys are going to just try everything and see what sticks. So I don't think a significant reduction is harassment is likely anytime soon.
Also, there's a sort of issue of the greyarrow.gif being equilateral, so there's no clear distinction of where does it actually point.

I know it "works", but it ain't "clean".
The only Lenovo that looks really tempting is the lenovo x1 carbon which isn't for sale yet
Restarting a program (in various profiles) for tight dev cycles; running unit-tests appropriate to the file I'm currently looking at; using REPLs (Redis, etc); publishing stuff to servers; hacking games which emacs ships with; going through a file and rolling increment certain numbers; and so on.
See Kin Lane's take here: http://blog.apievangelist.com/2012/07/12/dont-forget-about-t...
Devudu Chesina Manushulu Movie Review
Do you have any examples? Screenshots? I'd be interested to see how this is being implemented.
Afaik, the browser will read GIF once and keep the bitmap in memory, then composite it into the right place when it needs it, which is a lot cheaper.

With SVG, the browser will render it once and keep a bitmap, then composite it.

With a CSS icon, there is no way for the browser to know that it's an icon at all. There is no clear delimitation between it and the rest of the page. The browser has no choice but to re-render it every single time.

Images or SVG are much better choices for icons than a bunch of CSS.
Have you tried 10? I ran a speed comparison in my VM and noticed it was faster than Chrome on some pages (anecdotal not speed tested).
How the Richest 400 People in America Got So Rich - Yahoo Finance
Know what benefits Victoria BC website design provide you
Victoria BC Website design is a developing way to encourages your company in a best possible way. Here the most important is that are you sure about the concept and what design you want to add in your website? For more info visit http://threelionsdesignstudio.com/
You know what is sexism?
A qualified female applies for a job. A less qualified male gets it because he is a male. That is easy to interpret as sexism - deliberate bias of one sex over another. Groping a female - sexual harassment maybe. Sexism is not the correct term. Like others said, semantics is what we are upset about here.

Hacker News just happens to be filled with enough rational people who can identify what is and what is not sexism. No one here is sexist, or pro-sexism (for the most part at least). In fact, most of us encourage females to get involved in IT/CS.
It's also a reddit rule, though hard to enforce.
The thing that interests me most about the Elon Musks of this world is our economy's carrying capacity for such talented and ambitious people. Can we support 100 EMs? Would we run out of things to do? Perhaps this is the wrong way to look at things. Maybe all we need (can sustain) is a handful like him and the wealth they create will make all our lives markedly better, without us personally being involved ab initio?
Nope. I got it recently and can say for sure that it happened at exactly 500.
Oh, a lesswrong pedant. No, it's disproving his statement. You only need one counter example for that.
>>Take special note of my words above, particularly "DEEP DOWN"

Especially DEEP DOWN, that's where the problem lies.

It's called "Appeal to nature", and it consists of explaining one concept in term of another (love in reproductive drive), even though their fields of use are on completely different levels.
It's a form of reductio ad absurdum, which, even if ultimately and factually correct, adds nothing to the argument other than to discard important facets of a problem that are important for understanding the problem on one level, but not on the other, like, e.g.

"I am capable of feeling love without sexual connotations, but deep down I understand that the reason my brain loves is because it has found a worthy mate"

I'm sure a brother/father would be fascinated by that sort of reasoning :)

This is just to show that in your reduction of the term "love" to purely reproductional terms, you cast out a lot of complex interaction, because "love" exists on the level of rational human interaction, and is complex behaviour, whereas reproduction is not; in fact, the complexity of love is what makes it worth having a seperate term for "love" and "reproductional drive", and worth arguing about what it entails and its place in society.

To redefine it in simpler but unequivalent (even if related) terms, is to change the subject entirely, and that's why it's a logical fallacy.
Drag and drop just doesn't seem to be in the lexicon. It's only to be expected after 20 years of not having it on the web. Sure, there may be some exceptions - GMail's sorting into tags comes to mind - but it's just not happening any time soon.

There's also a good reasons all the controls like spinners and sliders and calendars haven't been around before HTML5. It can very easily be argued that they weren't needed before then. A language like JavaScript that doesn't even handle decimal points or localisation of date formats, currencies or calendars just isn't ready to keep that infrastructure up without any browser libraries behind it. And even HTML5 doesn't do anything to approach this. There is no sane mechanism to provide l10n or i18n on a website that integrates nicely with JavaScript or HTML5, and that's a major reason calendars won't happen. Ditto with the sliders and spinners. Why ditto? Because it's a symptom of the same problem.

What HTML5 is providing in the UX side in the examples given in that presentation is a very, very bare skeleton of a functionality that doesn't extend to provide good user experience. You imagine your Photoshop web designer bound to his iPad for the past two years, and there's no hint of appreciation for the default HTML5 slider there. And with good reason. It sucks.

Give some logarithmic stepped input. Or some way of CSS-enabling each component. Or some sane way of doing drag and drop in an easy way that doesn't require about ten JavaScript event listeners each, and it may work.

But right now, it's just plumbing and some elements that even jQuery UI does better. Maybe that was the goal of HTML5, maybe not. But it's not helping out there when people feel the need to rewrite and redevelop the wheel of every widget because they feel that the HTML5 standard just doesn't do enough.

It is doing some truly, truly beautiful things. The parser infrastructure developed for it alone deserves to be put in a museum and have temples built to worship it. But I agree with the presentation that ignoring so many things that Metro and Android and Apple have addressed over the past few years when it comes to Fitts' Law and loving usability is what HTML5 is doing. And it's kind of sad, because there's a few parts in HTML5 that should be driving everything. They are in Metro, but it's not the same.

I can't wait for the day when HTML5 provides a native way of doing semantic zoom or drag and drop or lovable calendar widgets, but it's not any time soon.

Thank you for the link.
List of fallacies is useful, I need it myself as I am as prone to making them as anyone else (I bet you can find at least 10 in my arguments). I would suck at sales. ;)
The problem with having a no-trust rules-only society is it would be terribly inefficient and things would grind to a halt. Every day you take actions and make decisions that rely on trusting others. In general people do not steal and cheat at every opportunity, and treating the world that way would be counter-productive. Taking the argument to the extreme, if you trust no one, you must have no expectations of any privacy as that is the only way to really be sure that people aren't acting differently than you would like them to. If everyone else is being watched you better believe you will also be watched. The cost of this regulation and surveillance would be obscene and the pace of progress would grind to a halt.

I think the reaction here is appropriate. There are laws that were broken. This is not scapegoating, it is punishing behaviour as should be expected. Yes reforms may be needed, and they should certainly be considered and I am sure they will be, but punishing those who knowingly broke the law and abused power for personal gain cannot be considered scapegoating, or punishment of any criminal activity must be considered scapegoating as it means society simply gave them too much power and trusted them too much to allow that activity to happen.
> A 1em font should probably be readable by someone with average eyesight everywhere

Huh? this makes no sense, as ems are relative units, while points are absolute [0]. If the element has an inherited or defined text-size of 8pt, then within that element, 0.5em==4pt. Hence 1em in <body> is (by default) the default font size of the browser, generally 16pt.

On topic: 12pt should be the same physical size everywhere. 12px should be the same logical size everywhere.

[0] http://jsfiddle.net/8Mv6x/2/
Acquisitions Can Cause Security Problems, Just Ask Yahoo
Platform: Get Noticed in a Noisy World
I enjoyed playing with IO a lot years ago, not sure I'd define it "newest" since it's around 10 years old now
I had a 5-year-old account on Reddit, and had been active on there from just about the beginning. I had hand-picked subreddits and the like. But, ultimately, it was better just to delete my account entirely and become a casual reader.

Wow, could you fill us in on exactly what happened?
I am a father of 2 kids, any side project will mean time away from them, and I don't care what anyone says, I prefer to have a balanced life any day. I also find my ability to work during normal hours (9am to 9pm, as I am freelancer) during the week is enhanced by my down time with the family!
There is no if. WP8 apps won't run on WP7 devices. Binary incompatible.
> Can we support 100 EMs? Would we run out of things to do?

Absolutely. When we run out of things to do, we go to Mars (no sarcasm). I honestly think we can do it. More importantly, Elon Musk thinks we can as well, and he has the means to make it happen.
http://cheeaun.github.com/hnmobile/
I totally disagree.

Side projects are a way to experiment and broaden your knowledge of technologies. Focus is good, but prolonged focus can lead to boredom and resentment.

Giving employees the chance to vent their creativity with new and fun technologies (via side projects) often leads to much happier employees. There is also a built-in feedback loop that allows that knowledge to flow back into the company with better practices, architecture or just the use of better tools.

Let me summarize it this way: Side projects are the best form of training you can provide for your employees.

And that's why Google has 20% time.
seems that the text-shadow is disabled now ...