skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks so much for your response. I guess I've been thinking if I was "inherently awesome" that people would want to hang out with me. Sadly I'm not the best at empathy and showing that I care about people. I'm thinking about asking someone I sit next to and talk to in my math class every week if they'd like to hang out some time, since at least that shows that I care to a certain extent.
I've never been invited anywhere, hung out with anyone, celebrated someones birthday, had a meal with someone except my roommate, or just done something fun with another person.

Oh dear, sorry to hear that. I'd invite you out but I'm on the West Coast.

Well, what you are going to have to do is start inviting other people out. When you're talking to an acquaintance that you find interesting, propose a dinner date or some other relevant activity (eg if they say they're curious about a movie or some upcoming sports game that you might also enjoy, propose going together). If you're not sure what a person is interested in, or don't know much about them, ask - when's their birthday, what do they think of that upcoming movie you're intersted by, what type of movies,/music/activities they like in general. Don't interrogate them, obviously - limit the number of guestions and give them time to answer.

You can also be frank about your own difficulties; mentioning Asperger's may sound like a medical problem, but it's perfectly OK to say 'I'm bad at finding cool places to go' or 'I'm bored hanging around the campus all the time, do you know of anything cool going on next weekend?' without making people think of the word 'syndrome.' And make plenty of time for listening to others (which I had to learn as a skill), because often they'll tell you about similar challenges they face. You don't need to have solutions for those challenges; eg if your acquaintance also mentions that s/he doesn't know anywhere cool to go, you could say 'let's just check out some place at random next weekend then.' It's OK to be shy, and to say that you're shy. If you're in a conversation and can't thinkof what to say, it's fine to say you don't know what to say. Social awkwardness is normal enough that nobody's going to hold it against you for admitting to it from time to time.

Think of friendships as a bit like gardening - you plant some seeds (make acquaintances) and you need to water them (regular social contact, pleasantries, small talk), but it takes a while for them to break ground and start growing up out of the earth, and staring at them won't make that happen any faster. So for the time being, just keep being good to your existing acquaintances, and display your interest in getting to know them better. Sooner or later you're bound to discover mutual interests, and once you have something to talk about in depth it's easy for a relationship to grow from there.
Public money would have eventually funded this as it's so important to know.
> Calm down. No one put words into your mouth.

I am quite calm, and I never wrote that anybody did.

> You, however, did put words into my mouth, which I find quite astonishing.

I think you need to look up what "putting words in someone's mouth" means, because I did nothing of the sort.

> Those windmills currently cover 1 million people. The world has 7 billion people and growing quickly. You really think windmills are feasible for Brazil, China, England, France, Germany, Russia, India, Pakistan, Japan, Mexico, Indonesia, South Africa, Spain, Argentina, or South Korea?

If power consumption had any sort of meaningful relationship with population, I might consider your argument remotely plausible. You're basing your entire argument on the flawed assumption that power consumption scales linearly with population. It doesn't, and you have reading to do[1].

Just as one example, the United States is the world's #1 electric energy consumer, beating both the whole European Union and China, but China has more than quadruple our population. As another example, India's population is quadruple ours, as well, yet about one-quarter our electric energy demand[2].

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption

[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_energy_consumption
The emphasis on supporting small casual transactions seems to have created a number of problems for the bitcoin infrastructure. Mt. Gox charges a small % for transactions (rather than a flat fee), a by product of this is it allows people to flood the exchange with a ton of micro transactions without any additional penalty for the volume of orders. Seems like this could be part of the reason they have been having issues.

Doesn't this also impact the block chain in some way? A ton of small transactions can flood the chain, requiring more computational energy to be spent than the transactions are actually even worth.
That is breathtakingly poor journalism/general knowledge
>The group claims that the patents violate the First Amendment by restricting the free exchange of ideas on human body parts.

It will be interesting to see this argument being handled in the Supreme Court. If looking for a specific gene is patentable, it comes very well into the definition of patenting a purely mental operation.

In a comment about patents two days ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5540438), I linked to a talk which also brought up the fist Amendment issue with patents, and how it connect to software patents. You can also just read it (and thus jump directly to the related parts) in this transcript: http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/twiki/bin/view/LawNetSoc/Bils...
> I'll be honest I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt Google would intentionally hurt themselves by ruining their search results. Also,

I think it's more likely they have competing objectives and they can easily allow their search result quality to slip in order to have large gains in other areas because, honestly, they have a complete monopoly on search.

The days of competing on search result quality are long gone.
Interesting, because the only slow action when opening mailboxes is fetching and applying the thread index, and gmail does not support that particular feature. Which means I don't really know how it can take a "few minutes" on GMail -- all it does it simply fetching the UIDs...
In other words, Government code is no different from anyone else's code.
Lawyers are a bad example as they don't run on profit based accounting, typically. More of a fee for service arrangement. There do exist some lawyers with for-profit side businesses, or solely work for a for-profit business, but they're probably outnumbered by law firms + sole proprietor service provider + employed by non-profits + employed by .gov

There is no obvious reason other than tradition and cultural goals that a lawyer has to be paid $200/hr instead of $20/hr, ditto no reason a postdoc biomedical researcher has to be paid $30K/yr instead of $300K/yr. The supply of STEM grads is too high leading to low pay and the supply of lawyers is too low leading to high pay, but if you can convince the kids to select different majors, go ahead.

We live in a central govt controlled economy. If you have control of the government, which we probably don't, then you can also select the priorities.

It also has the assumption that profit is the only reason why people work. Simple salary arrangements work pretty well for most people, as does contract work. Some other ways people make money without profit include prizes (Nobel, etc) and being cultural heros (pro sports athletes, unfortunately definitely not biomedical research scientists)

Finally some people just love the subject area and will voluntarily starve their family, look at any STEM other than CS/IT/high level applied medical (aka hospital dr cardiologist etc). I would not bet on it, or demand that only people taking a vow of poverty are "real" scientists or whatever. But there always will be some nuts willing to eat Ramen every night for the rest of their lives.
What's surprising is there's no way to disengage the generator and just let the turbine spin for nothing when there's excess power. Seems they could push around seawater if they need the resistance for structural integrity.
It's not a steady supply over power, it fluctuates with your supply and demand for it, so it takes work for another grid to take that power from you. If you send them power they have to scale their plants down to prevent the problem you're having. Then when your supply goes down and you no longer have an excess of power to send they have to scale their systems back up to make up for the power you're no longer sending. They can't store it or get rid of it easily. It's one of the reasons people don't like wind and solar power, it works great when the wind is blowing and the sun is out, but it fluctuates too much and causes heavy swings in power generation that have to be dealt with somehow.
You have a currency that requires a history of every transaction ever. Perhaps the hypothetical government is confident in its ability to unmask pseudonyms, and it will soon have access to everyone's financial history.

</tinfoil>
One piece of advice that I really liked was in David Kelley's book about the virtue of benevolence: treat strangers like acquaintances, treat acquaintances like friends, and treat friends like family. Building relationships with people is a progression, and one of the two parties has to make the gesture to become closer.

In short, don't wait for acquaintances to treat you like a friend and ask you to do stuff, treat them like a friend and make the first move.
REE's installer is interactive; if all installers were interactive (with a fallback flags system for non-interactive execution) then you would be able to customize them without needing a third-party program (homebrew).

Thew fewer third-party programs necessary to install an application, the easier it is to install and the less likely there will be errors. That is empirically true (based on my experience installing things on all 3 major OSs).
I'd have thought amounts of energy involved are so vanishingly small compared to atmospheric wind in general that it makes no difference.
I think the python people made a few choices which prevented some of the problems:

1) It is very clear which version trees will accept new language features vs. libraries vs. bug fixes. 2.7.x for instance generally only gets bug fixes at this point. (although they sometimes but rarely break that rule).

2) There is a clear path for language changes via PEPs (Python Enhancement Proposals). These are similar to RFCs.

3) Virtualenv does not attempt to manage python versions. It instead manages which libraries are installed you point it an existing installation and it symlinks the interpreter to the virtual env folder. That interpreter simply appears before the usual one on the path. It is not as heavy weight as RVM or RBENV. In general it seems like virtualenv is much more flexible about the way it can work than the ruby versions are. It is fairly un-opinionated.

4) Python programs can be packaged as .debs and so forth without too much overhead and without using the python setuputils during installation. Installing the library basically amounts to copying some files around especially if any extensions are pre-built. (which they can be in a binary distribution). Since new python versions in the 1.5-2.x line are strongly backwards compatible shipping a newer interpreter doesn't usually cause headaches for the applications which use it and were written for a previous version. I have code which was written for the 2.2.x and it works fine with no modifications in the 2.7.x line.
"an article describing an entire nation implementing almost 25% of its total power demand via wind"

25% of its electric power demand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Denmark#Overview seems to put that at less than 5% of total energy (production minus export is 230 TWh in 2010; electricity production 35 TWh) corrections welcome; couldn't find a better source without effort)
Sure, so I'm not sure which "output" you mean. The output of the computationally-intensive part is really just a magic number that solves a puzzle. Once a miner finds that magic number, they publish a block that has the most recent transactions (which are all verified separately), as well as the special transaction where the miner grants themselves the current mining reward. Other miners see it and verify that all that stuff was correctly computed.

So that whole block (which is maybe what you're calling the "output"), does contain the puzzle solution as well as all the latest transactions. But the actual specifics of the puzzle (which is currently brute-force SHA1 reversing), aren't super important. It could always be swapped out for some other task.
Completely agree AM. I would have no problem if the person were using our domain, but they're not. They're squatting because they realize that someone ELSE will want the name. They have accomplished nothing from an innovation point of view, they've only seen some stroke of potential innovation -- which is why I compare it to a patent troll. Patent trolls don't actually innovate, and neither do people who buys what they know will ultimately be a catchy domain.
The short answer is: no.

Any windmill impact from changing wind patterns or reducing wind power is radically less than eg building homes (given we build millions of homes annually), or simply driving vehicles (of any sort, given the numbers of vehicles globally).

You could never build enough windmills to cause a problem. The only real environmental concerns are killing animals (insects?), and construction / manufacturing related.
Just a correction that the email address I received it at was wil@wilwheaton.org, not .net.
AlphaHex - Simplified event sharing
I'm learning web development and this is an example of what I've made. Honest feed back would be much appreciated.

Here is another project that I'm working on:
http://www.messagehash.com
"3. A friend suggested this: because they felt their currency would never become the standard reserve currency, and they felt it was better that no one's be if theirs couldn't be."

I don't think you need to be a government to feel this way. The fact that the United States gets off for so much bullshit compared to other nations is obviously a direct result of the USD being the world's reserve currency. In my opinion, if you could somehow create a world reserve currency that a single nation couldn't control, exploit, and ultimately abuse, that would be beneficial for all humanity. We could do great things, like become a "planetary" species and drop the concept of borders and nations. From there it will be much easier to get to space and begin exploring the stars, which, in my opinion, is all of humanity's ultimate goal.
Do you have a more objective source?
What's stopping all these companies from growing the talent themselves? The rhetoric always makes it sound like the sky is falling and if they don't get their super smart foreign staff NOW, the business will crash. The problem is that this sort of story plays out year after year with one tech group or another having a "critical shortage." You'd think if this were an immediate problem then these companies that were unable to source and retain talent would have died off by now. Surprisingly they're still here.

And the types of talent that the likes of Google or Facebook would be interested in -- genuine genius and extra-ordinary ability-- already have visa programs: O-1 and EB-1. It's just that H-1B visas are relatively easier to get.

So what makes getting immigrants a better proposition than growing the talent yourself? Everyone wants the talent, but nobody wants to cultivate it.
First, don't give up. Your not the only one who faces such issues, trust me. And you may not feel it, but it's brave of you to ask for help.

I am an introvert, didn't really interact with people much when I was younger, but when I got older I found that roleplaying games, specifically live action roleplaying dramatically improved my social skills, taught me how to interact on a team, how to lead, etc. It's geeky, but that shouldn't frighten you, because you will meet people with a range of social skills. One place you can check is owbn.net, see if there are any games near you.

gknoy suggests the SCA which is another good way to meet people.

The other thing you could do is involve yourself in the internet, and socialize that way. Join a group minecraft server, or second life, or something. Even interacting on forums or subreddits.

Finally, try hanging out in the computer lab. Maybe help people. Become a lab tutor... that's one way to have a built in group of people to interact with.
It's an economic phenomenon that I am interested by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem
Bitcoin was out almost two years before the Wikileaks blockade:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoind#History_of_official_bitc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks#U.S._diplomatic_cabl...

Sure, it was probably someone who exchanged messages with some cypherpunks at some point. Since that includes most of the skilled crypto implementers I know, it doesn't narrow it down much.
Right off the bat:

> It would really be something if intelligent people chose to invest more trust in a currency system built and managed, in large part, by anonymous computer hackers than they did in currency systems built and managed by governments of the people, by the people.

Chris Robert doesn't seem to understand the mathematics behind bitcoin. The whole point is that the bitcoin network doesn't require any trust, or rather, it only requires trust that the longest block chain is mostly honest and that the current understanding of cryptography and computational complexity theory is correct.

Then we have Robert McMillan:

> Unfortunately, as those familiar with Paul Krugman’s writings on liquidity traps know, Bitcoin’s known and finite supply dooms it as a workable replacement currency.

This is a common straw man argument. Which bitcoin enthusiasts have claimed that bitcoin needs to be a "workable replacement currency"?

> Furthermore, as it has no apparent use-value (unlike, say, Platinum), this kills it entirely.

Technically, since a bitcoin is a proof that a certain amount of difficult computational work has been performed by or on behalf of the current owner of the bitcoin, there is some use-value. Bitcoin can be thought of as a networked version of Hashcash that allows the work to be performed in advance. Mail servers could be configured to require that a tiny amount of bitcoin be attached to every message it receives, hopefully making most spam unprofitable. This is probably merely an oversight by Mr. McMillan, but does this really even matter? What is the apparent use-value of a government-issued currency like the USD?

Matthew Bishop poses an interesting question:

> But what if a sovereign state was to issue an algorithm-based currency? Would that drive fiat money out of business?

I wonder if it would also drive non-governmental crypto-currencies out of business.

I find the following quote from Brett Gordon humorous. Economists don't seem to agree over whether bitcoin's deflationary nature is a benefit or a drawback. It's almost as if different people value different things.

> Two benefits are that bitcoins are inherently deflationary and transactions are anonymous. Given the recent slew of fiscal crises and increasing concerns about online privacy, these are two strong points in bitcoin’s favor—or whatever future crypto-currency arises.
As a european developer and HN reader I've recently been wondering how feasible it is to move to the states after I finished university.

It seems the general trend would be something in the like of getting a visa, start looking for a job and be lucky your employer can get you a green card. After this 5 years of living in the states before you can become an American citizen.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong!
As a full time Android developer, I can tell you that wouldn't be a burden.

First off, there are already lots of places you have to handle compatibility based on the version of the phone, intents available from other apps installed on the phone, or capabilities (even something as basic as a phone can't be guaranteed if you support tablets).

Obviously you can turn small things on and off in a block of code with if statements, but you can handle major changes with the Fragment model. If you have a drastically different UI due to a missing intent/permission/API feature you can actually ship the app with 2 different Fragments and decide which one to show at runtime.

As an aside, I turned off auto-updating for Facebook and will not upgrade from here. Too many permissions, too intrusive to the UI. I have deleted Facebook from my phone before and I'm fine without it now.
How To Install Git Subtree on Mac and Ubuntu
What's at issue is not the "right to patent human genes" but the right to patent in vitro copies of human genes. The claim from one of the primary patents at issue:

"An isolated DNA coding for a BRCA1 polypeptide, said polypeptide having the amino acid sequence set forth in SEQ ID NO:2"

Now, in order to perform any medical analysis on your DNA, you need to make copies, so this is essentially the same as patenting the gene itself, but it does make the argument a little bit more subtle. Still a ridiculous thing to patent — I don't see any novelty in an vitro copy of something that occurs in nature — but not as obviously a product of nature itself.

Also, the author says that the "genes in question, BRCA1 an BRCA2, often appear in cancer patients." In fact, every human being always has those genes, but they become mutated in often stereotyped ways in cancer patients.

Back in my Ph.D. days the scientists I worked with were pretty much unanimous in thinking these patents should be overturned — they very strongly hinder basic scientific study and medical analysis. And they're not a patent on a method, or a type of analysis, or anything like that — just a patent on a straight-up in vitro copy (and not the method for copying!). I don't see any economic value in protecting that at all when a first-year grad student had the skills to do that from a human DNA template decades ago.
Attacks are continuing, I've logged two more attempts from todays. There is no reason these sites have login attempts from said countries:
79.28.255.65 (Italy)
80.35.80.139 (Spain)
Fixed; thought it was in context, thank you for clarifying that it isn't.
Can you elaborate on the scaling issues? Being able to query into JSON fields (including functional indexes) is a great helper for denormalization which is very good for actually increasing scalability.

For me, the native JSON support is a very handy tool to have in the toolbelt for parts of our application that have a very loose schema.
The stuff you really have to worry about is the stuff you don't know is toxic.

There is a chemical compound called MPTP. It's directly toxic to dopamine neurons. They only discovered it when an underground chemist accidentally made it when try to synthesize a synthetic heroin (for lack of a better term).

I remember a chemist on the East Coast went back and looked at the structure and realized the stuff he had be working on had that active core. He had worked on it for 5+ years.

The problem is, you don't get symptoms of Parkinson's unless you've lost close to 80% of your neurons. I'm sure that East Coast chemist is dam near guaranteed to get Parkinson's at an early age.
There's a lot of stuff in jQuery that's not monadic, but that doesn't disqualify it. There's no law that return(return(x)) has to be defined - a Haskell List of Integers is still monadic, even though return(return(1)) would be a type violation. And undefined code can do whatever you want and not be a problem for the definition.
That's IE's fault. CSS3 transitions really should've been in IE9.
How would this work? Having the whole blockchain available, one could write a program fairly quickly to take all of those transaction splinters and narrow it down to the real source and destination addresses.
Possibly because someone wanted a market demand to drive down the cost of ASICs for cracking AES256?