skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Except that will not accomplish Palestinian goals at all : if Palestinians show restraint, that will be followed immediately by Israeli restraint, and there will be peace.

Palestinians (well, Hamas, but they do have a lot of popular support, probably close to 50%) want to conquer Israel, so obviously they attack. They inspire their life on their islamic prophet, who amongst other things was a person that personally started over 13 wars and had over 1000 people executed on a whim.

I don't understand how anyone can reasonably expect non-violence from them and be taken seriously.
Why is this not documented on Twitter somewhere I would have seen it?
A lot of famous people are on Twitter and some have rather large followings. Many interact with their fans daily (rather than just pushing out announcements). I thought that this was one of the big draws that brought more average people to the platform.

Not only this, but with respect to news media outlets, a number of their reporters/talking heads have active Twitter accounts.

Also, just because Hollywood can benefit from Twitter doesn't mean that they are going to show up at their door begging for a deal.
> You are assuming every language is as shitty as Java.

Perhaps. Java, C#, C++, PHP, Python, Ruby, etc.

> Yes you can, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from making a dozen different doThingToCustomer functions/methods scattered across a dozen different classes.

If Customer is a class, it's pretty difficult to doThingToCustomer() that the Customer itself doesn't allow.

> And how on earth does this bizarre notion address the class of errors you were complaining about, which are type errors?

Just as I said above, it's difficult to alter the contents of an object in a way that an object doesn't allow. In "pure" Alan Kay style OOP an object is something that responds to messages. In loose languages like Python you can reach into an object and mess with it but that is discouraged.
It sounds like you do believe in the NAP. You just might disagree about how society can or should transition into one that follows it.
I am amazed that a human being can cover 100 miles in a day, even if on a bike. Awesome.

I feel like such a lazy bum!!
There's a great novel based on this very concept: Fine Structure ( http://everything2.com/title/Fine+Structure ). Definitely worth a read.
Have you tried tweetdeck? It does just this. Set up columns for hash tags that interest you, and you can see what the entire twitterverse is saying about those topics in real time.
I didn't see the potential of this idea when I first heard of 42Floors.

Then I needed to find office space.

Looking forward to seeing this in Atlanta!
Here is the deal with politics on hn, as I understand it... As hackers, we like to learn about complex systems and figure out how they work. Politics can be very complicated and there's a lot going on behind the scenes. Any story that explains how something works as opposed to advocating for a political position will probably not get censored.

Of course there are exceptions. Anything related to the technology of politics, patents and topics of interest to the tech community (like net neutrality). To answer your question specifically, Ron Paul is personally popular with many members of the tech crowd. He's a big deal on reddit and with many members of our community, so he kind of gets a pass.
500 million to 1,000,000,000 is a laughably fantastic estimate.
Maker of Airport Body Scanners Suspected of Falsifying Software Tests
It's hard to create examples of something in a system that has never existed.
I've been waiting for them to come to NYC. The real-estate market is fundamentally broken here, with the interests of brokers and searches totally at odds. This is a welcome development!
I dunno, there's some folks in Afghanistan and Iraq who did pretty good for themselves against our high-tech arsenal with just some old automatic rifles and homemade explosives. Vietnam, too.
How about we take the declaration of human rights solution. As soon as one side in the conflict uses non-clearly marked military bases and/or forces, the other side gains the right to fire on civilians if they suspect (not: can prove) that there are disguised combatants and/or military equipment near them.

Does that sound reasonable ?

If Israel stops fighting today, tomorrow the holocaust restarts. If Palestine stops fighting today, tomorrow we have peace.
I had an intern that worked as a "Chugger" [1] once and I asked her (an attractive female) how many people she managed to sign up for direct debits in day and she said "It depends how many silly boys there were around."

[1] https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:chugger
Just messing around...

"A": Nothing

"AB": Fine

"ABC": Fine

"ABCD": Where am I?
Why is it so hard to say that one entity is bad without litigating the badness of every other entity? The military wing of Hamas is bad. They shoot rockets at civilians, deliberately, presumably in a bid to draw Israel into unrestrained conflict. They are killing civilians in order to start a war. That's bad. They're bad. Bad is practically their charter.

Are there worse entities? Sure. Now back to the matter at hand.
Thanks for the excellent explanation, and many congratulations on your thesis!:)

Could you point to any resources on time series analysis? While i am well familiar with supervised/unsupervised learning methods for tasks like classification, anomaly detection etc, analyzing time series is a different beast. And most machine learning literature (eosl?) doesn't seem to address time series data either.
Best Ways to Save All the Useful Articles You Come Across Online
- user names are a huge part of what makes Twitter interesting, imho it's not meant to be the type of service with real names

I am genuinely curious of the use cases where the username adds more value than the name associated with the account. I'd also like to know what type of service twitter is supposed to be in your view.

- replies do get grouped as complete conversations, and it's been that way for a while now.

Technically they do, but visually they are a mess. The way humans naturally converse is by adding their comments to a topic. This is why facebook lets you comment on a wall post. If you read a wall post and the comments, they make sense. On twitter, it begins with reading some random comment and then having to reverse engineer the conversation it possibly may belong to.

- lists really aren't that hard to use, I don't know what your problem with it is

On twitter.com, in order to see a list, I have to click on an icon on top, click on "Lists" and then click on a list name. That is 3 clicks and a page reload compared to facebook's 1 click. Furthermore, so I click on a list, browse and want to click on another list. I must hit the "back" key resulting in a page reload, and then choose another list.

it would drastically affect how the service works and feels

Sure it may feel drastically different...but that could be for the better, no? 140 char was a great thing to launch with just as facebook restricting to college campuses was a great hook - but products evolve to accommodate wider audiences. Twitter hasn't.

My personal reading is that twitter long passed the threshold where it would be some underground place and increasingly tries to present itself for the mainstream--without changing the product to accommodate the mainstream. The equivalent would be facebook opening up to the world but building features mainly for the college market.
On OSX I just use the built-in 'open -t', which works so long as Sublime Text is configured to open .txt files.
You're conflating multiple different things. You can have big government without multiple layers of contractors. E.g. the federal court/prosecutors offices are a pretty huge operation in the aggregate, but it's all distributed so each office or court individually is small and lean.

At the same time, one of the ways to get "small government" has historically been to outsource as much as possible to contractors. That's why the military industrial complex looks the way it does.
This talk was given at the Communitech Mobile P2P meeting in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada on Wednesday, November 14th, 2012.
The biggest problem with enterprise is budget. People tend to see short-term gain as opposed to long-term gain.

Bureaucracy and mediocrity are minor compare to the usual mindset of budgeting.
? explain your point. you are saying than in a full libertarian society there would not be any corporation? i say there would not be any USA, nor society.
If you want more insights about the things discussed here, there's an interview that Mark Suster did with Joel Spolsky last year where they talk about the "API wars":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZWBtfSBlp8#t=2240s

They cover everything from the early days of Excel's API to the downfall of myspace and the rise of YouTube and Photobucket, and how twitter took off. It's worth your time.
No, you want black markets and cryptography.
I'm not sure its fair to say "Republicans", as if there's some consensus outside of the paper, regardless of the amount of Republicans in the Republican Study Committee. I doubt most of them know the paper exists, never-mind what conclusion it might draw. There's also no saying what percent of republicans and percent of democrats might agree with the paper. For all we know 70% of democrats and 40% of republicans might agree with the conclusion (pulled out of a hat, I might expect the % agree to be roughly the same for both parties).

It's unfortunate, and I'm having a hard time finding a way to put it nicely, but other issues seem to take up most of that party's time. If the Republican party pivoted to being a fiscally conservative and socially apathetic party then they might actually do very well.

If they spent their news cycles advocating research on the myriad topics in american law that border on cultish in acceptance, such as copyright and, sure, poverty reduction programs that may or may not be worth their salt, they might do great. We could use a party of respectable scrutinizers that stand skeptical of any longstanding policy that might be costing citizens (or civilization) too much.

But they don't do that. Instead they spend their news cycles (conservative news stations and radio) on all this cultish crap of their own. Obscene amounts of doom-saying over every thing they might dimly disagree with. XYZ is going to "take away" guns, and kill jobs, and "ruin" (ruin!) the economy, and force an end to all prayer, and other ridiculous characterizations. Taxmageddon is the newest one. Taxmageddon. Returning to 90's tax rates is the End of Days.

Lofty policy other than tax cuts, if they are thinking about other policies at all, are certainly rarely talked about, at least on the national stage.

It's an interesting paper we've got on our hands here, but we have no reason to believe that the majority of republicans know it exist, never mind that they are ready to be serious and sincere about examining party priorities that might stop the entire rest of their platform from being a blocking issue towards voting for them.
Decentralization is really the key thing, not whether the work is done by the government versus contractors. The government can be very efficient doing things in-house as long as the efforts are decentralized. The US Attorneys Offices handle tremendous caseloads for their staffing levels relative to private law firms. The Army Corps of Engineers is also quite effective because it's decentralized.

Things that are a mess are often centralized and involve too many contractors. Defense, the VA, etc.
Noam Chomsky on artificial intelligence and the future of Neuroscience
Doesn't surprise me.

Yesterday I set off the alarm because my sock was bunched up, but it didn't pick up my belt-buckle (I forgot to take off my belt).

Have also gone through them with a phone in my back pocket on accident, with no alarms.
The stairs in the Apple stores are made almost entirely out of glass. There are no steel beams holding it up, the glass itself bears the load. The ones you usually see at high-end buildings/shops only have glass steps and/or sides. And don't forget the curved ones [1][2]. They are also earthquake-resistant for the japanese stores.

[1] http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/29/stunning-photo-of-glass-...

[2] http://www.eckersleyocallaghan.com/projects/project/apple-sh...
Canary takes 0-6 weeks til Dev, then 6 weeks til Beta, then 6 weeks til Stable, so it's 12-18 weeks.
I personally think Ron Paul is bad*ss, but that was what I was implying...(him getting pass while others don't)!
We have a lobby system in place. Why would the world be any other place than upside down? You've got a tobacco vote in the House and John Boehner is handing out checks from the tobacco lobby. Really?
With a variable-frequency drive (or better yet, flux vector control) you can achieve full torque at zero speed with a squirrel-cage motor.
Oh wow you'e totally right :-)

It's under, "introspections" if anyone else is looking.
> If the Republican party pivoted to being a fiscally conservative and socially apathetic they might actually do very well.

Unfortunately, parties can't pivot on a dime. It's going to take decades. However, the Republican party is moving in that direction.

Most young Republicans are fiscally conservative and socially apathetic.
Or situations where you aren't really to fussed about what you drink, it is often better to get something different suggested to you than selecting one of the first few drinks that come to mind when you go up to the bar.
I kind of do that in reverse.

"£10k is a really good deal but I need to OK it with my wife."

comes back 2 minutes later

"She says we can't afford any more than £9k."
Were their costs that high? You might want to see what sort of deal they had with ServerBeach back in the day. Considering that SB didn't even have bandwidth monitoring, never mind billing, at some point, how bad could it have been?

If they were doing it today, there's no way they'd ever find an unmetered pipe to the outside world. People know that video over the web is feasible now, and that means bandwidth is treated differently.
The headline is oversold. The meat is this: "The conservative-led Republican Study Committee just put out a Policy Brief that questions forty years of bipartisan support for tougher copyright enforcement".

Now that's good news, and I think the analysis in the post is spot-on. This is the kind of thinking we'd hope to see out of a "new, more moderate" reinvented republican party. But one policy brief does not a policy make, and this one doesn't even (apparently) advocate for any explicit policy.

They're dipping a toe in the water. At least they're thinking about swimming, but we've got a long way to go before this turns into something worth voting over IMHO.
Yeah, that's a bit confusing. Using Cloudfront with an S3 bucket is double billed, the first time. On a cache miss Cloudfront pulls the object from S3 and serves it to the client. S3 bills the regular data transfer out. Cloudfront then bills the regular data out to client rate.

On subsequent requests, cloudfront cache hits, you're only billed by Cloudfront. Cloudfront request + byte rates are cheaper than S3 in Us-east-1, IIRC. So on popular or high ttl objects it's cheaper to serve through Cloudfront. On low ttl or low rps, like a few requests per day, it's cheaper to use standalone s3.

The same origin + CDN vs CDN Hit math applies to EC2 as well. I do wish the billing was clearer in these scenarios.
Using Tor Mail seems like it would be very anonymous. Though if they're sniffing your traffic the Tor signature makes you look suspicious.
It is insane twitter is trying to reinvent irc in all the bad ways.
the internet is a medium ,not an institution.
I know I'm not completely immune, so I have one simple rule - never buy anything on the spot that costs over a certain margin. The margin depends on the kind of things - may be smaller for small things and larger for bigger ones, but usually somewhere around $50-$100. And that is regardless of any offers, discounts, special promotions going on just for the next 50 seconds, etc. I might be losing some deals on that, but I don't think so. If he was genuinely ready to go down 20% today to make a sale, he'd do the same tomorrow.

So if I see something offered that I need to buy and the price is attractive, I leave and wait for some time - again, depending on the sum in question it may be a day, maybe more. If after the wait the offer is still attractive - I take it. If after the pressure is off I discover the deal doesn't look as nice as it looked - I pass. If the salesman says "if you don't buy now, the deal is off" I say "it was nice talking to you, good bye". So far this rule worked quite well for me.

As for using it in business - it is used all the time. I've been subjected to it (to remove any doubt - in US, not Israel, and not by Israelis :) many times, and not only in the malls. It is being used because it works - you think people doing it do it for their own enjoyment? They do it because that's how they make the most money. Not my money, though :)
Cloud payroll service debuts in US market
For those of us that don't get sucked into these easily, more than anything it is probably that we just don't engage the sales person in the first place. I never purchase anything being sold these ways, but I can't really say I have given the sales person enough of a chance to employ these methods on me.

I have an aversion to anyone who is pushing sales onto me like this. Even if they were trying to sell something I would be really interested in, the method would cause me to avoid it.
With stencils use drafting pencils/pens that have a steel sleeve and are designed to be held at right angles to the paper.
I guess I don't see why saying they're bad matter in and of itself.

Of course they're bad.

So what? We give weapons and money to lots of bad governments. Should we do so with Hamas? Just saying "they're bad!" doesn't really answer any interesting policy questions.

But hey, if you think foreign policy is about feeling moral superiority by saying "they're bad!" over and over, please don't let me stop you.
I totally agree with these points. Especially regarding unsubscribe. For whatever reason a LOT of online business seem to think, "Hey if we make it a pain in the ass to unsubscribe they'll just keep reading our mailings." This is wrong and, at least in the case of anyone I've talked to, just fosters ill-will and eliminates any possibility of retaining that customer.

I've resigned myself to automatically being signed up even though I think it's a shady business practice. These mailing lists should always be opt-in not opt-out. I shouldn't have to scour the checkout page to find the box I need to click that says, "No thanks, I don't want crap in my inbox every day."

Regarding the iPad thing, I rather dislike anything web-oriented, or anything for that matter, that requires I have a specific resolution. I keep my browser as a half-screen always and generally speaking if I have to resize it to read content I just don't bother.

Lastly, I sort of disagree with the use of the word cost in this context. This isn't really a cost, at least not in the way I think of the word cost. Unless they're paying out this money for infrastructure, wages, etc. to process unsubscribes it's not a cost.
I'd agree that without a monopoly you'd have lots of deals being struck. If you're just talking about violence-suppliers, the likely equilibrium is no violence at all.

But you're always fighting over stuff and, moreover, people. In all the cases I can think of, violence-suppliers would look at all the people it can extract value from, look at each other, and then combine forces to extract the most value from people. The only time they'd fight each other is if someone miscalculated who had more capability to deliver violence. But either way, violence suppliers would either combine forces or get destroyed, ultimately leading to a monopoly and making violence a profit center.
>Now think what happens when a Monsanto executive realizes that paying the occasional legal suit is cheaper than keeping their packing plants clean and disease-free.

The maximum allowable punishments under libertarian law would be very harsh. Endangering swaths of people's lives could result in that executive's death. It wouldn't be just a matter of paying off a small bribe. For details on the theory of proportionality, see this PDF from page 12 especially: http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/b...
It'll be whatever is on special/they have been asked to push by the owner.

I think this was discussed in Kitchen Confidential in terms of food.
Even if he didn't write it, his name was on it. I feel pretty safe loathing anyone who would put their name on something a) they hadn't read b) they hadn't written and c) was so goddamn vile.
I guess what he meant is that in a libertarian society corporations would not be able to lobby the government for special (monopoly) rights and privileges - because there would be no government to lobby. Corporations would have to rely solely on consumers to generate profits by providing services consumers want. And if they fail to do so, they'd go out of business and no one's gonna bail them out.
Design patents are the US version of a registered industrial design. It only stops competitors from copying your design, and doesn't harm innovation at all, and may actually encourage it. The shape of an akg headphone, a coke bottle, nike shoes, swatch watches, macbook, ps3, tic-tac box, bic pen, a ferrari... This is what stops chinese factories from legally selling exact copies (visually at least) of everything you know.

Did you read the link you pointed to? It says this Article establishes yet another basis for policy makers to free design patent standards from the unworkable and inappropriate nonobviousness requirement. If I sell a computer that is just a small completely clean white cube, which no one else does, is it an obvious design?
I wonder how many more times the TSA will be proven worthless and pointless before something changes. But in reality they will just get more tax money thrown at them. 2015? 2020? 2025? By 2030 they will be their entire own industrial complex bigger than McDonalds.

The annual incidents should be hitting the opening minutes of TV news in just a few days with the man-on-the-street responses "Oh well, groping our genitals, what can you do - we need to feel safe!"
"You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”"

-- Lee Atwater's Secret Decoder Ring for Conservative Doubletalk

http://www.thenation.com/article/170841/exclusive-lee-atwate...
Microsoft begs Web devs not to make WebKit the new IE6
I didn't mean to stop the discussion, I'm simply trying to understand your point of view (I might learn something). Do you think Israel should sit idly by while the 25K citizens of Sderot can hardly live their lives?
You can also pipe text into subl and it will open in a new Sublime Text tab.

find . | subl
Generally, no. I think we should tend to avoid giving money to organizations that fire missiles at civilians in order to purposefully start wars. I think that's a pretty easy line item for our foreign policy rulebook.
What makes this different than the other "Web OS" projects that have been done before? There's been quite a few, and no one seems to want them.

Isn't the Web OS the browser? Why should we add another layer (your-app)?

What is the value-add?
Bummer, it brought a good chunk of users & sign-ups while it lasted! Thanks