skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, that is a fantastic option, and why Minneapolis has such great bike path, I believe. But, you've got to have the tracks first, and I'm not sure many cities do. And even then, you can't choose where your paths go.
the post is not only about RJS, about the whole concept of it
I obviously meant I'm asking an open ended question. Can we not edit a post after submitting it?
1. Yes, I meditate. As of now I don't do sitting eyes-closed meditations regularly (I should). I keep up the state of not-attaching to thought, of remaining in "presence" (also called the I-am or Being). Once you get it, you will recognize what I mean.

2. Meditation has side benefits of helping with concentration problems, sleep issues, maybe even some psychological issues (there's a lot on it if you google 'meditation and neuro-science').

However, the original and main purpose of meditation was what is called "liberation" or awakening or enlightenment. Along the way, the grip of the fictional mind-created entity called the "self" or "me" weakens and at some stage just collapses. In a few cases this happens suddenly with no practice (e.g. Eckhart Tolle, Sri Ramana Maharshi). What happens further you will just have to experience yourself but this much I can say: as the false self or "ego" weakens and loses control, suffering also reduces and a time comes when you know that mental suffering is over for you.

There is far too much material on this. You can spend a whole life just reading (and as a result yourself get nowhere). Everyone will have their favorite books or resources or people. I would recommend Power of Now by Tolle as a very accessible book. There is also Sri Nisargadatta (I am That, and many other works, available on the internet freely in text/pdf form).

Most threads on HN recommend mindfulness and give you links to documents for that. Mindfulness puts the attention on the body and thus takes it away from the mental process. The references I gave (similarly) take the attention away from mind to what is present or aware (without going to the body). So these approaches still have a lot in common.

Whichever route you take, it is important to start practicing (stilling the mind) asap, and not get caught in the reading trap.
yes this is another good reason to avoid it
180,000 cyclists and peds did get out of their cars to walk or bike on the most recent "CicLAvia" event [1] [2].

------

[1] https://billrosendahl.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/ciclavia-to-t...

[2] http://www.ciclavia.org/about/
2 let's start with the fact that rails escapes all html by default in normal views. In .js templates you have to do it manually

1 AJAX updates are easy, right. w/o RJS as well

i don't describe my approach because my approach is different — i wrote a post about other websites' approach (RJS is used in the wild)
I wish they lowered this limit to 15.
If you think of it in terms of job openings, sure, but that's myopic. I'm thinking of it in terms of the number of people who could be profitably utilized to improve the material well-being of humanity. My notion of the "work that needs to be done" is in no way limited to what current job openings exist. In fact, there's likely an infinite amount of work that needs to be done. The limiting factor is the number of people capable of doing it.

For instance, what if we multiplied by one hundred the number of researchers working on major problems like fusion power or eradicating disease? There isn't anywhere close that number of people qualified to be physicists or medical researchers, though, so it simply isn't considered. There are probably enough unsolved problems in materials science alone to profitably employ twice the number of currently unemployed people for a lifetime, except all those unemployed people are almost certainly incapable of becoming materials scientists.

My job, and likely yours, filled a "job opening" that only existed because someone else did the basic work of building the technology and the infrastructure to enable the creation of that job. The more people you have doing that work, the more job openings pop into existence. Don't think of it in the sense of Google or Amazon having only so many job openings, and once those are filled, that's that. Think of it in the sense of Tim Berners-Lee building something that enabled every single job at Google or Amazon to exist in the first place.

It doesn't even have to be that radical. A healthy, growing company expands at a rate that's eventually limited by the number of people it can hire. Once it hires those people, it expands its operations until it needs more. So even on the most basic level, simply counting job openings misses all the job openings that would be created once the first batch was filled, and so on recursively.
There is so much competition for the jobs in India (supply of people for any technical position is very very high) that there is really no incentive for the companies to even come close to offering a work environment similar to the US. If someone is not satisfied with the work environment, it is not as simple as going to a better place. Someone else will gladly take over their position as it is still going to be a top job in India.

Since a lot of these software companies operate as satellite offices for major US firms, their primary goal is to maximize the margin for these firms, so they will do the bare minimum to get by.

I especially love Bollywood movies that portray software jobs and also call center jobs similar to the US but the reality is far from the truth.
Almost all performance brakes have this easy drop in pads to make changes faster at the track (I'd change pads 2-3x a track day in my evo). They bought an off the shelf brake setup from brembo. Nothing special here for people in the know.
I think the argument you quoted (and it looks like your reply somehow got attached to the wrong post) was implying that the supply of labor is unnaturally inflated by requiring people to work to eat. Basic income, the argument proceeds, would allow unwilling suppliers of labor (the "wage slaves") to drop out of the market, as they naturally would if they weren't forced to participate. There would no longer be a need for a minimum wage at that point (since all wages earned go on top of a basic income), so the supply, demand, and price of labor could reach their true equilibrium.
(If (speak you (polish reverse) naturally)).
Unless she invented the power hour when she was like 4 years old, i'm pretty sure this headline is inaccurate.
"He's the Chungwit the Biff Boff and the Puff Pastry Hangman"

(ref: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3XgouVH9-Y )
Design is different enough from programming that if you're trying to learn both at the same time, you'll eventually give up. I believe that if you want to be effective, you have to get to a point where you can express yourself fluently in code, without any hiccups at all, before you can give design a shot.

Because basically, design (at the beginner's level) is a whole bunch of little tweaks until something looks just right. If you are designing in the same environment you code in, say by making your tweaks directly to the HTML/CSS, you're just going to get frustrated if your tweaks take any longer than a second or so to make and reload your page. To use a car analogy, it's taking your mechanical know-how and suddenly jumping into a NASCAR pit crew. You're not just fixing the car, you're doing it lightening-fast and super-accurate. If you're not already shit-hot, you're just going to burn out.
BI income should be available to people that really need, because in most countries there are no resources to give it to everybody. Even if there were, I challenge who believes in BI to tell me if the State could not put that money in research, education or just decrease taxes and get a better outcome for its people (and humanity).

We have a lot of deadly diseases and a growing need to utilize more and more efficiently our scarce resource (food, energy, etc.), we need research, we need development, we need innovation. I really struggle to see that coming any faster, or at all, in a world were resources are spent to let a big portion of the population stay at home.

And please, let's not mix what goes on today, the unemployment rates, with historic economic circles. We are seeing this unemployment since when? 2008? 5 years are not enough to draw drastic conclusion on an economy and its workforce. By the way, 10% unemployment rate says nothing, look at the active population, which usually ranges above 40%, counting kids and pensioners. Which is quite a high number if you ask me, it's not true we don't need workers anymore, you know...
Perhaps you prefer ruby?

$ irb
>> 12/13 + 7/8
=> 0
That's not the intention of guaranteed minimum income at all

Aside: there's a difference between "guaranteed minimum income" and "basic income", at least as I've seen them discussed here on HN. As I understand it, an $X guaranteed minimum income encourages laziness because the first $X worth of one's labor is essentially wasted. Basic income, on the other hand, is added to whatever a person earns from labor, so there's no disincentive to work.
Is your startup spending too much time building and not talking to customers?
thanks kashrr
Adaptive streaming: access apps, HD video and your whole OS from the cloud
Well, I'm guessing your second and third point could be tacked on to HAL.

I see your point with the first one, although I must say in our APIs we have rarely encountered duplication. And the recursive nature of HAL makes it really easy to generate on the server-side.

(By the way, we've introduced a sideloading convention that only when you pass along ?embedded=author,comments those sub-resources will be present under _embedded. This way the clients can easily request only what's needed.)
>they don't switch on the AC for cost cutting, even in peak summers when temperature here reaches around 100 F

If you don't mind me asking, what company does this?
Can you respond to this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5654301
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5649317
1) Not okay: what constitutes the 'best interests of the USA' is in the eye of the beholder. A libertarian might have a different outlook on 'best interests' than say a religious zealot, etc.
In my opinion, we are having some serious problems with the words we are using.

We are mixing aesthetics and stylizing with things like ui flows and product design. Just becasue it's called "Design" it doesn't mean it can only be done by people with "Designer" on their titles. It seems that the only reason we are separating "Development" as another dicipline incapable of doing some of the things we call "Design" it's because we don't call it "Code Design".

A visual designer is as capable of developing a useful and functional ui design as a developer. Even if one is called "designer" and the other is not. Stylizing is another matter.

PS: My point is that some of the activities we are calling "Design" are VERY different to some of the other activities we are calling "Design". We lump them together because, well, they are called "Design". But they are not equivalent, not even related really, or at least not more related that some of those "Design" activities and "Programming".

As a metaphor, Architecture is not Interior Design, nor is Structural Engineering. An Interior Designer, by definition, is as prepared to do architecture as a Structural Engineer... and even less so in some cases. But with the right training, both can become Architects. Or for an example closer to software, Game Designers come from a lot of backgrounds, from art to writing to technology. Their backgrounds affect the type of design they do and their focus (Jon Blow, for example, prioritizes the "mechanical" design of the game, while Edmund McMillen works mainly from an stylistic point of view), but all of them are doing great game design.
Ask HN : How to aviod new job anexity?
I'm a s/w dev changing jobs for the 4th time in 3.6 years! Still I feel pretty anxious about getting into a new job, seeking some help to stay clam.
speaking of 200 vs 204: any way for the client to signal he's OK with just a 204 after updates/deletes?
I can recommend The Non-designers design book by Robin Williams (if you can find it). It's excellent.
I highly suggest that in this day and age, you teach using simplified characters. For entire swaths (not to mention the overwhelming majority) of Chinese people out there, simplified is the way to go.
As the workforce will be replaced more and more by robots and machine learning / A.I., people will be left jobless. BI will have to be adopted.
In the second sentence of the article, it is revealed that this is the title of her music album. This is why it's quoted.
"prestige points."

AKA "Whuffie" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whuffie, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_King..., http://www.gutenberg.org/files/8086/8086-h/8086-h.htm)
be scared... be very scared
There have been a number of BI experiments and the results have so far been universal, initial growth followed by stagnation.

The challenge is to create productive work for these people so that they can earn an income. Some of the Chinese 'make work' projects have been interesting in that regard but they are not a final solution.

What might be a more durable system would be to create a manufacturing plant that these folks could work in. It doesn't have to be complex, could be as simple as making cinder block for building construction. It has to be run as a business in the sense that standards are set and checked and people are paid based on their production. You have to be rigidly scrupulous about keeping corruption out of it, this is a lot harder than you estimate. Ideally the production is consumed in other projects. (like building buildings or railroads or other factories).
It was funny/sad that people commenting on her blog assumed she was male due to the topic.
Was it changed? Musician defeats trademark seems to in no way be relevant to your comment
For reference, how long does it take to drive yourself?
Very interesting game, and I really like the look/feel of it. Defiantly need more explanation, I have no clue what I'm doing in there!
> However, if the state either takes money (via tax) or centrally creates money (via inflation) to give a "guaranteed basic income", it is essentially forcing the store owner, truck driver, and rice farmer to work for free

We live in a society where production is large enough to cover all basic needs. That we still have famine, lack of health care and education is a big failure. Especially children - they are innocent, they are not responsible for this unequal situation.

Come next 20 years, robotics and A.I. will replace most of the work force. Then people will have to get BI to survive.

Consider the BI as an dividend from the common technological wealth of humanity. The rich own technology, exploit natural resources more and have financial tools that give them a huge advantage.

They can't hog the resources while other people starve, remain sick and uneducated. We don't need the morality of the industrial workforce of year 1900 any more.
Your snark is much appreciated. Sometimes a question is just a question.
You'd make more if you took money to send third parties to the sun.
These decisions aren't made at a personal level.

E.g. when you provide people with free healthcare instead of giving them money, your are implicitly constraining their choices. Same for food stamps, free public transport for the poor, etc.

Determining who is in need means, for example, not giving welfare to people who are not genuinely searching for work. This is a difficult decision to make but it is done fairly well in Australia. It is mostly based on objective criteria e.g. filling in a list of places where you applied for work, showing up to interviews that are arranged for you.

I suspect that your objection is not to the general principles listed above, but rather to listing them explicitly without any disclaimers like "I know the government often gets this wrong" etc.
Just remember how meaningless and insignificant it is. Whether you do well or poorly, get laid off or stay for many years, whether people there think good of you or not... you're still just a few molecules on an insignificant rock floating in space, for no reason and with no purpose, and so are they.

That helps me, anyway.
No it isn't. It's creative math to get the mathematically challenged to jump in. Since math illiteracy in the US is common this is a very smart way to get idiots with money to buy in.

OK, say I have never owned a car and just got a job making $900 per month. No other expenses in my life. I jump on this deal. I then send 100% of what I earn to Tesla. Not $500. I have to send them all of it. I don't get to magically deduct fuel I will never purchase and pretend I am spending less. My bank account would be empty every month.
Funny how when things favor women they are just "objective facts" and therefore can't be labelled "sexist".

While all the things men are better have have already been proven to be results of cultural bias by esteemed sociologists...
I call it "the right to quit."
I've been looking for something like this since spintoapp.com is shutting down and no longer supported
g400 (which is disappointing because my mx518 had no troubles on linux)

noppoo choc mini (only the new ones, the old ones work fine on linux). The keyboard at least is a solvable problem, and the weirdness is in large part due to the weird firmware which sort of pretends to be two keyboards. I found a fix for OSX, but was unable to figure out how to get it work in linux in under an hour. So, I just got an older keyboard for work where I have to use linux, and went back to using only windows at home.

I'd love to be in a situation where people who made peripherals made them work on linux in addition to windows, but that's not the way things work atm :(
That happens when one of your neighbors either got no mail that day, or had their mail held.

The mailman gives the next stack to each house in turn, and apparently didn't notice the address was off.

In my case it always happened when it wasn't my regular mailman.
In terms of science research, the impact has been unparalleled. It's hard to find a molecular biology paper that doesn't owe a ton to having the full human genome sequence. There have also been technology side effects. Just like defense projects fueled the early market for silicon-based semiconductors, the HGP kick-started a market for sequencing machines that is generating a huge revolution in sequencing technology where costs are now falling 5x-10x per year, which is quite a bit faster than Moore's law.

In terms of finding genetic causes of disease, this happens every day, and is practically mundane, but there are two complications towards getting to cures. First, most disease is far far more complicated than a single gene; any single gene may account for just a percent or two of what we call the same disease. Second, knowing which gene is broken does not provide a cure for that disease; even for a given small molecule, determining if it will interact with a gene's protein or have any effect on that protein's structure or function is a task that physics has not been able to tackle. Additionally, the genome has only been available for a mere decade, and for many if not most diseases, the process of going from a known gene target an approved drug is going to take far longer than 10 years.

So the HGP has fueled a huge amount of discovery, is the foundation of nearly all human biology research, and is completely indispensable, but in terms of new cures for various diseases it has not delivered, yet, but really it shouldn't have to.
> which would in effect add a politician into scientific studies.

"In some cases this will keep vivisection away from innocent animals."
You can eat quite well on $3/day. $1.50/day of food is comfortably above subsistence in the US.

A diet of strictly rice and beans will net 1500 calories for $.30 - $.50 per day. That's not an appetizing diet, but provides a base number for calibration.

Cheap eating discussion:

http://forum.earlyretirementextreme.com/topic.php?id=599
Ruby on rails security
Can someone please rate on security level for Ruby On Rails ?
I used to be all for the way backports are handled, until I had an excruciating experience with a perl module recently (the Locale::Maketext vulnerability). 1.19 is vulnerable, so they "backported" the CVE change, without realizing that this means their franken-1.19 version is exactly the same code now as the latest 1.23. All that's different is the POD and $VERSION.

Which sucks, because application software needs to handle environments with Locale::Maketext 1.19 differently to environments with 1.23, else you get double-escaping bugs.

The response? Reporting the actual, correct module version (or god forbid, sync the comments/POD as well) instead of the incorrect, unchanged version number "would break stuff". As opposed to incorporating a breaking API change without bumping module version, which also breaks stuff... Ouch.

I guess I only have myself to blame, I should be more involved with debian maintenance of packages I care about.
The main problem with RTFC is that it tells you nothing about how the code is supposed to behave, which is important. Yes, I can see, by looking at the source, how this version of this code behaves, but unless I have an interface spec or some documentation, I have no idea whether this behavior is intended or not, and therefore I have no idea whether the behavior is something I can count on in v.next. This is one reason my current project uses a whole stable of ruby gems that we are absolutely terrified of ever upgrading: all we know about their behavior is what we can observe about one specific version of the source.
If it takes $22/hour to "live," what are the people in Mexico, earning $5/DAY, doing? Are they not living?
GitHub's one clause is a rather alarming.

Your account can be suspended and your data deleted any time for any reason.

The addition:

...forfeiture and relinquishment of all Content in your Account

I'd like to think they go to suspension first and deletion as a very last resort well after you're notified of a reason. This rather draconian provision feels unnecessary when you could similarly go with just a "if you store illegal/liebelous/infringing stuff here, we'll delete it" clause.

They're not unique in this regard, but I'm curious as to why companies that genuinely care about the integrity of the data and the trust you place in them to store it will include such a statement in the first place.

That conflicts with the next one quite badly.

Transparent security practices

How is an opaque deletion policy considered transparent?
Please provide me an ans.
String concatenation is usually way faster both at runtime and at code-time than the alternatives.
Can you prove that? If not, it's just a baseless opinion.

Isn't that just a charming response to get?
Or you can just run debian testing, which is many cases is at least as stable as other distros.
From a philosophical (but also biological) point of view, sooner or later we will all die.
From an economical point of view, the Registration fee is way cheaper than a grave on the Earth :-)
But Red Hat used to (they probably still do) continuously backport a lot of drivers an functionality from newer kernels to their older, stable, kernel for the first 5.5 years after a release:

https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/

So I don't think RHEL/CentOS can be compared here to Debian.
Yeah, they could have gone down the /var/srv direction, which would have been OK.

But I think /srv actually makes more sense as /var is often on separate disks because /var/lib/ gets very IO heavy.