skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why do the links take me to the actual onion site? Let's say I visit your site. Then I am viewing real news that looks fake (i.e. just poor and sensationalist journalism). But once I click an article at the top, I'm taken to the real onion site - with fake news that looks real. With the sites looking the same, I might not notice I've changed to the real onion...

Very confusing.

Also, as said before, hotlinking to another site's resources is not a good idea. At all.

Execution aside, I don't like the idea. The Onion provides well written fake news. The content that you're linking to is a poor excuse for news; its the low-hanging fruit of the internet. I couldn't see myself browsing this stuff. In fact, the reason I browse HN is to not have to deal with content like this.
Thought it was going to be just another todo-list app, but actually pretty interesting!

Though the use model might be ahead of it's time, since I don't think most people can interact quickly enough with the app to have this take off (I imagine that the idea is to basically annotate ANYTHING, and keep your notes on it forever) -- I do this often, but not nearly enough to seem like it would be worth it?

App also looks good, go pastel colors
How Many Drone Licenses Has the FAA Issued?
So, just get two larger quadrocopters and you could walk across a gorge. Each one would just catch each of your steps.
Social change (without revolution) doesn't come until enough of the already empowered embrace it. So it may seem trivial to those of us that have seen far worse, but the alternative is for the white and rich to never hear about the problems that have affected one of their own. Since most people only recognize a problem when they are personally at risk, this sort of "whine" is a necessary part of the process.
This isn't another freaking social app. They are production constrained; in the old economy that is considered a good problem to have.
Tutorspree.
I got the same thing in Safari 6.0.2 (stock install) on latest Mac OS X
> you're getting compile time type checking and near-Java speeds

The static compilation added in Groovy 2 is much faster than dynamically-compiled code but is still buggy e.g. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14774709/groovy-2-1-0-wei.... It was written by one developer, and first shipped in Grails only 2 months ago, which doesn't even seem to use the static compilation features (correct me if I'm wrong). Let the Groovy/Grails developers eat their own dogfood first before recommending Groovy's static compilation to others.
Not even just according to the author. According to the official reason the airline gave him. I can certainly understand why one might suspect this isn't the real reason, but calling the guy sensationalist for repeating EXACTLY what he was told is pretty insane imo.
How pleasantly presumptuous of you.
Doesn't work properly in firefox, either. Not optimizing for mobile is fine. Yeah, it'd be nice, but it is an "extra" thing. having content cutting off in a major desktop browser on a large (1920x1200) screen? No excuse.

edit: Doesn't work in opera either, but it's not as bad.
Why I'm Not Sold on Google Glass.
So in most negligence cases, plaintiffs have to prove that the defendant failed to exercise "reasonable care." That is to say, the defendant failed to live up to the standard of caution that society had established for his activities. The standard is context-specific, but is almost always an objective one. What would a "reasonable person" have done in that situation? What would a "reasonable store owner" have done about the ice on the sidewalk in front of his store? In answering this question, the jury gets to impose its understanding of how an ordinary person should behave. This is true even in technical situations. Engineers at car companies are ultimately held to the standard of "did they behave like a reasonable person would?" Expert testimony can help explain to the jury what it needs to know to decide that question, but its the jury that gets to decide where the bar should be.

Medical malpractice is different. In medical malpractice, the relevant inquiry is: "what would a reasonably competent doctor practicing in a similar community have done?" That is to say, medical communities (e.g. rural hospitals in TN or urban hospitals in NY) get to establish the standard for how much caution doctors should exercise. Expert testimony is admitted to explain to the jury whether or not the doctor adhered to those standards. The jury doesn't get to establish the standard, only to determine based on expert testimony whether the standard was met.

The practical takeaway is this: "most deep oil drilling engineers do this" is a far weaker defense in a regular negligence suit than "most doctors do this" is in a malpractice suit. The medical profession is allowed to regulate itself in a way that say oil drilling companies are not.

As for alternatives, here's one paper that gives a pretty good literature review and suggests some alternatives: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195420/

Richard Epstein's (a very prominent law professor) suggestion is to let patients contract with hospitals ahead of time to agree on dispute resolution mechanisms: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124631652544770707.html

As a general matter, there are a fixed set of ways to deal with this kind of problem. You can have private litigation (as in the malpractice system); you can have government regulation and enforcement (e.g. as in environmental protection); you can have administrative claims systems (e.g. as in workers compensation or no-fault auto insurance).

The alternative to the malpractice system is one of the above. It's not capping damages for a grossly negligent baby delivery to $50,000 despite the fact that it could easily be an injury of several million to the baby and his family (and ultimately to society through lost productivity).
We don't tend to go during the day, and this would require a second person in the mall. It will be investigated soon, though!
The slides in the github repo ( https://github.com/jbangert/trapcc/blob/master/slides/PFLA-s... ) also have a few interesting points, like "No publicly available simulator implements this correctly" (how did they record the youtube video?) and a few vague hints about exploiting this for doing VM escapes.
We can stop contributing to the problem by trying to make a buck off people's misery, and stop voting for those opposed to doing healthcare as a public service.
I've been around since the early days of the web and I never understood why other people decided it ought to be bad form. You put it out there to be downloaded, why shouldn't people download it?
This is extremely weird..I am speechless..
LivingSocial denied unequivocally the following:

* That the investors PrivCo mentioned as participants were participants or even investors in LivingSocial

* That it was a debt round rather than an equity round

* That the liquidation preferences on the deal came close to 4x

* That it repriced existing shareholders

* That quotes attributed to LivingSocial personnel were real

These are not minor details. They are major details. LivingSocial's CEO would have to be lying about very important facts that will inevitably be public. PrivCo, on the other hand, merely needs to claim they were misinformed by their source to extricate itself.
Worse battery life compared to an Apple? I think you are wrong. I think Google is being pessimist when estimating the battery life to be 5h when their capacity is 59Wh. For comparison, Apple advertises the MacBook Air 13" battery to be 40% longer (7h) when their capacity is 15% less (50Wh). Maybe Google estimated a higher average power consumption (eg. using the LTE wireless network which is more power consuming than wifi).

MacBook Air 13": 50Wh - starts at $1200
Pixel: 59Wh - starts at $1300
MacBook Pro 13": 74Wh - starts at $1500

Basically, the more you pay, the more capabilities and battery life you get. And both Apple and Google seem in line.
> "No publicly available simulator implements this correctly" (how did they record the youtube video?)

Probably by patching the emulator.
Good reasons. Thanks for explaining.
By fixing bugs in Bochs?
> companies build screens with more code friendly aspect ratios

I hear this complaint a lot and I think it's based on a flawed premise.

Taller aspects might be better on very small screens that only fill tiny portions of your vision but on bigger screens -- the sort you should be using if you're working regularly on a computer -- you want wider not taller. It's the only way to usefully use your field of view. This is why wider aspects exist.

On my 16:9 aspect 27" desktop screen, my vision is practically filled in the vertical direction -- it is easier to glance to the horizontal edges than the vertical ones. I would use more horizontal space before I used more vertical.

And this is the point of wider aspects -- they use your eyes better. If you buy three screens for your desktop, you don't stack them vertically -- you arrange them horizontally so you can actually see them.

People who keep asking for squarer displays for work should simply get bigger displays and stop pretending that a 13" laptop display is ever a good choice for a working display.

Frankly, anything sub 24" is not a working environment. Anything smaller is either (a) something you use occasionally when you're not at your desk or (b) for people who are not working.
Maybe a dumb question, but why would a Usenet server be IPv6 only?
Yes, on workstations. Not on laptops.
Wow you're right, I should probably throw away my car and start walking to work, walking to the store, walking to class, walking to the lake pulling the canoe with my hands, trudging through a few feet of snow and ice in -10F weather to get everywhere.

Or maybe you're not actually better than everyone else. I can tell you that your fair trade coffee and quinoa sure didn't arrive from South America by foot.
The system is rotten to its core. I'm a "lucky" one. I'm in Europe and I've got a mandatory healthcare which I'm paying big bucks for and I'm also taking an additional insurance, covering fancy costs (like if I want a chamber alone in case I'm hospitalized etc.).

The problem is that this whole crazy-high-prices / insurance / pharmaceutical / medical / doctors / nurses costs are giving a sense of entitlement to basically everyone in this mafia: from the state (which feels entitled to tax everybody up to level that are already considered to be confiscatory to some, like in France) to the practitioners to the insurance companies to the doctors and to the... patients!

And don't you there criticize the highly-socialist nanny state for running on deficit, always creating more and more state debt, or you'll be labelled an ennemy of the human race: "what!? you want the state to give less money to healthcare, you are a cold-hearted selfish man!"

The whole system is rotten and I this point I wonder if I'm going to keep doing exams and going to the doctors.

The drain on the economy is so gigantic that we could already be, today, lagging behind in our understanding of science and medicine compared to where we should have be if we hadn't allocate such a gigantic amount of our resources to this mafia.

It's a big business and it's ugly.

It is indeed slowly killing the entire economy. The problem is way more serious than the derive of finance. Finance looks like a tiny toy compared to the whole healthcare / pharmaceutical / insurance mafia.

In the end socialist and their never to be questioned healthcare cost are going to drive countries to the only possible exit: state default.

And when that is going to happen I can tell you that the quality of the healthcare system is going to take a nasty hit.

You socialists are going to get what you're begging for.
The article says that without subsidies the big banks would about break even. Does that presuppose that toxic assets are recorded accurately in their books? I recall that there was controversy about this, and then the issue seemed to vanish. If toxic assets have not been accounted for accurately, how big is the discrepancy?
My theory is that maybe this announcement was intended to make the $1500 Google Glass seem slightly less ridiculous. It's going to take more than a $1300 Chrome book to do that.

In all seriousness though, I was really excited about this when I saw the first video, then it was reported to be a fraud, and now all of a sudden it has an i5 and it costs twice what I thought it would.

At 600-700 bucks, I was ready to trade in my iPad, but for this amount, I'd rather get an XPS dev edition or a 13" retina macbook for just a bit more.
But they are "gaggles of peers out together". Not stuck in front of a TV every day after school for hours ... like my generation watching early sitcoms/varieties/crime/kiddy shows that don't even move the nostalgia-meter decades later.

I'm not from phone generation, I won't use a smartphone, I don't have any idea how much more tightly-wound-together their lives are then ours were. But I'm sure they are, because they're in touch. They're busy adapting, for better or worse, to the consumer/tech world WE created.

If WE don't like it, then WE have to start thinking about what it means to have young impressionable minds plugged-into the mothership all day long. These appliances are far from transparent, their comms can't be easily shut off, and there's little OWNER-control over their features or bad habits. Anyone who wants to worry, try focussing on that for a while. Their appliances don't give them the autonomy ours did.
Evidence of Water on Primordial Moon, Amount Rivals Total on Earth
Avoiding Git Disasters
Google announces $1299 touchscreen Chromebook Pixel laptop
Hacked ATM plays Angry Birds
As I read further into the very long article, I think we as a society should consider statutory / compulsory licensing for medical patents, especially drugs. In Europe they limit prescription drug prices to a certain profit margin. This is again "cost plus" pricing that reduces the prices relative to what we pay in the states.

It may raise everyone's costs however, because this "cost plus" regulation incents manufacturers to increase costs to increase profits.

Statutory licensing would do the opposite: allow companies to compete with patent holders on efficiency of manufacturing while creating a mechanism to repay R&D.
>"Hello, I'm not a terrorist"

I'm afraid that under no circumstances would this be a good idea. It reminds me of the phrase

"John F. Kennedy was not a homosexual"

from Chip Morningstar's essay How To Deconstruct Almost Anything [1]. To present an example of deconstruction Morningstar deconstructs the phrase thus:

"It is not generally claimed that John F. Kennedy was a homosexual. Since it is not an issue, why would anyone choose to explicitly declare that he was not a homosexual unless they wanted to make it an issue? Clearly, the reader is left with a question, a lingering doubt which had not previously been there. If the text had instead simply asked, "Was John F. Kennedy a homosexual?", the reader would simply answer, "No." and forget the matter. If it had simply declared, "John F. Kennedy was a homosexual.", it would have left the reader begging for further justification or argument to support the proposition. Phrasing it as a negative declaration, however, introduces the question in the reader's mind, exploiting society's homophobia to attack the reputation of the fallen President. What's more, the form makes it appear as if there is ongoing debate, further legitimizing the reader's entertainment of the question. Thus the text can be read as questioning the very assertion that it is making."

Shift the above text to the present tense and replace "John F. Kennedy" with "the passenger" and "homosexual" with "terrorist" as needed.

[1] http://www.fudco.com/chip/deconstr.html
I don't see how a correctly-working free market would lead to a different situation here. The market is necessarily inefficient:

1. Consumers don't have the skills required to estimate the value of medical care.

2. Consumers don't have the time to negotiate prices: if you're dying, you can't wait.

The question here is not doctor's salaries, that's a red herring. The question is why someone without insurance pays so much more than someone with insurance, if the care received is the same. It's because the insurance companies have the time and skills to negotiate prices, and individual consumers are under duress. It's the same reason that workers in unions earn better wages -- although the numbers are different: Wikipedia puts the gap between union and non-union wages at 21-32% in the US, and the gap between the cost of insured and non-insured care is much higher.

I say we have a moral duty to replace the current, broken, free-market system. Evidence from countries other than the US supports the theory that socialized health-care can be more efficient.
You say no one expected it, but I think everyone who worked in telecom expected it.

Think about how applications got onto phone before the iPhone; all of the money was "pre-loads". In a world where the only access comes from a a proprietary cable in a factory there's no reality of consumers updating.

Moving from that to a agile development cycle turned out to be too great a leap.
I don't think they're separate. Shorting a stock means you make money from the stock's decline, and therefore from the company's failure. You hope to make money from your investment, so you hope for the company to fail, at least indirectly.

Furthermore, shorting a stock can harm the firm. Big short positions drive down the stock price, which affects public sentiment (their stock is down, they must be failing, I won't buy their car because they may not be here next year), makes it harder for them to retain employees, makes it harder to raise money by issuing more stock or bonds, etc. By shorting a stock, you are contributing to that company's failure (though of course the effect is miniscule for retail investors like me).

I would not buy even a undervalued stock for a tobacco company, because I don't want to support producers of tobacco products. And I don't want to impede progress in electric cars by shorting their producers, even if I think their stocks are overvalued. There's plenty of other investments available that align my finances with my hopes.
He was shown the rule, thought about it, and then objected, implying future rule breaking was in store.

Really? Saying that you don't like a rule imply's thay he would break the rule, thereby meaning (according to
DanBC & Terretta) that he broke the rule? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
No you licence a "page" to use it. A "web application" is not covered by the licence. The single website licence is nearly useless:

> For use on a simple webpage that is not considered a web application. A web application is a website that has customer specific data or charges for its use. This requires a Developer license.
Domai.nr links to GoDaddy too. So much for you saying, I'll never use your service not just because you deal with GoDaddy, but because you even considered dealing with GoDaddy. Never.
> I think Google is being extremely pessimist when estimating the battery life to be 5h when their capacity is 59Wh.

The battery life depends, not on the watt-hour rating, but on the watt-hour rating divided by the power required. More power, fewer hours. Maybe Google knows something about the actual power requirements that resulted in this estimate.

Just as an example, if the unit requires 11.8 watts, then the battery life will be:

59 watt-hours / 11.8 watts = 5 hours

> For comparison, Apple advertises the MacBook Air 13" battery to be 40% longer (7h) when their capacity is 15% less (50Wh).

Different battery, but also different power requirement.

> Maybe Google calculated it while assuming you were using the LTE wireless network, or streaming HD movies, or something else quite power-hungry.

You're speaking as though all these units have the same power requirements.
Collection of Technical Newsletters
Oh snap!

Sorry I missed the boat on letting you have fun with the CSS (I'd be glad to point it back if you would enjoy it!) But yes, this was built in a few hours and most of that time was spent playing with caching and deployment. Not so much "lazy" as "rushed." (considering this is for the lulz, I'm OK with it being called rushed.)

So yes, to be clear, this was a "lets have quick fun and make a satirical mashup" not a "lets spend a week designing a web site that looks like The Onion." Not sure where scum comes into play given that fact, but I'm sorry if the project pissed anyone off over there. In my experience different people react to détournement in different ways when they are the ones being shifted around.

As for the circles, you're right about not us being in touch with the dev teams over there.

Regarding fonts, noted; I'll wait and see if there is a formal response from The Onion on these fronts but you clearly know the first-hand vibe -- if that's upsetting people I can remove them.

As for the other media we're aware of that and will be making a move soon, THERE ARE ONLY SO MANY FINGERS ON A HAND!
I tried out J a few years ago, and after that, tried out APL, on which J is based. I prefer the APL syntax to J's because it seems to be more readable, perhaps because the brackets are always balanced. APL's semantics are simpler, not having the hard-to-grok ranks or the hook & forks.

Entering the non-ASCII characters isn't too difficult. E.g. in NARS2000-32 for Windows, we can use the mouse at first to click the buttons, but it doesn't take long to remember the keyboard shortcuts for the most important non-ASCII characters.
It's true the free market isn't functioning in healthcare. You mentioned doctor supply. During the late 1990s the American Medical Association convinced the government there was going to be a "doctor glut" so the American taxpayer subsidized medical schools in exchange for not graduating doctors, $100,000 for each doctor not trained.
I've always found this stuff to be interesting on a variety of levels. What happens when maintenance stops? What state did they leave things? In the cases where you have before and after shots - or multiple visits spread out over a long time - it can be even more interesting to see how things turn out.

If anyone else wants to see more of this kind of thing, I've spent a lot of time looking at places on the Detroit Urbex site.

http://detroiturbex.com/

I'm sure there are some other good explorations out there, and I hope this thread turns up a couple other hidden gems that don't pop right up on a Google search.
LinkedIn Platform Launches OAuth 2.0 Support
Yes, it's the coolest docking station for the MacBook!
Job Posting 
I am the Head of Talent at Identified.
I am looking to hire a Jave developer.
Would love to share the opportunity with your members
Woot! Thanks for sharing!
I recently became a Rackspace customer by default, as a result of the Slicehost acquisition. I honestly haven't dug very deeply into their offerings and the transition has been pretty seamless. So I don't really know much about the difference between their "regular" cloud and their "managed cloud". Would anyone care to share a quick tl/dr on what their "Managed Cloud" offering gets you?
Because it means they pay to host and serve it, while you reap the benefits.
SpaceX Dragon to carry manned crew to Mars in 2018
Meteor 0.5.7 released: major scaling update, new DDP version, EJSON
Aren't most of their videos using a tether though? Which is pretty much the same "only works in the lab" issue.