skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, the economics of the region. It's a 3rd world country, not to be trite, but if you've never been to a 3rd world country before or read anything about those places, the realities are very different than in the 1st world.
Used to use pool acid and foil in a 2 liter soda bottle. Poor the acid in the bottle, pop a crumpled rod of foil in, seal the bottle, walk away.

The foil takes a few seconds to start reacting so you have time to seal the bottle. It gets hot so the bottle starts expanding and finally pops.

One time the bottle expanded but didn't pop so after waiting for a minute or two I walked up. As soon as I touched the cap it popup off and covered me with acid. I ran to the closest house and used the hose to pour water all over me.

I'm guessing either because it was spent from reacting with the foil or because it's made for pools and not all that strong that I didn't get any burns. That was the last time i did it.
Thanks. I could find some references using those keywords!

Do you then also know about the cost per query as compared to a Google search? Or alternatively, how much concurrent traffic can they handle with that server?
undefined != unlimited

Just sayin'.
Because the money given is not enough to comfortably live on by itself, and definitely not enough to be wasteful. In communism the incentives aren't there because you can't get more money by working harder. With this plan you have all the time in the world to get money by working harder/at all.

If someone blows all their money on drugs they need a rehab facility.
[ "cache invalidation", "naming things", "off by one errors"].length != 2
Average probably 5-6 hours, on balance.

I admit I'm a bit amazed to see the number of folks who report sleeping 10 or more hours a night; I've been assuming normal sleeping habits were around 8 hours a night.

Personally, I do best on 8 a night (i.e., waking without an alarm), but I sacrifice quite a bit of sleep trying to work more or less full time but also be a more or less full-time parent to a 4-year-old and a 7-month-old.

The trickiest part is finding long unbroken stretches of time to concentrate on harder problems; I can manage emails while distracted, or in short bursts, and simpler coding tasks, but solving trickier problems usually happens in the middle of the night.

I tend to alternate sleeping 2-3 hours one night (e.g., 6-8am), then 7-8 the next. I feel mostly normal even on the days when I'm running a more serious deficit and don't generally feel sleepy during the day, though I can tell when the side-effects (reduced patience, mental errors, etc.) are creeping up more, and I'll try to spend a few nights in a row sleeping more.

I don't generally drink anything caffeinated, particularly when I'm running on little sleep, or if I'm planning on staying up to work -- it seems to affect me much more when I'm seriously sleep-deprived, giving me an unpleasant jittery feeling; the worst part is that I can't sleep when I want to, but my concentration is ruined, so there's no longer any point to staying awake.
Excerpt:

"At small scales, drag and friction gain importance in flight dynamics. As a result, many components in large robots, such as gears and pulleys, don’t work in tiny flying machines."

So they are the size of a penny.
Congratulations on a successful test flight. Aircraft that fly up to Mach 10 can still use radio communication. That wasn't the case with the Falcon Project's HTV-2. I guess the Air Force wants a GPS-guided hypersonic cruise missile.
decoded from intermodulation distortion in the radio's Line Out audio

I wonder if this is a fairly common side channel attack? The most common in the domain of digital crypto is time (e.g. all password inputs must take equal time to check vs a given password, otherwise you leak info about the password) but distortion seems an obvious attack vector against analog crypto. Though I don't know if it's merely obvious in hindsight, as are most things.
If it makes sense, that's not why. The reason we started giving people money during Katrina was precisely the change in their circumstances, not their steady-state condition. Suffering, at least the perception of it, is largely relative to previous experiences.

Your comment is especially ironic given your username. ;)
The thing about the basic guaranteed income is that it's not usually thought through beyond the first step.

Let's extrapolate it out. Say you receive this income. What would you do? Perhaps you would go down to the store and purchase rice. The storekeeper has to work to manage the store, the truck driver drove the rice to market, and the rice farmer had to plant and harvest the rice.

A portion of your rupee today goes to the storekeeper. But a portion also diffuses back to the driver and the rice farmer. Those signals are the signals for them to keep doing what they are doing. Yes, it's true that the storekeeper bought the rice in advance of your purchase, but if you look at this as an iterated purchase: in general money flows opposite the flow of goods/services.

They accept your money today on the tacit belief that you have provided enough value to someone else, somewhere else that it will even out in the end when it is their turn to consume.

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. The monetary signal becomes broken and no longer signals that the person on the purchasing end has produced something in return for this rice.

The shopkeeper, driver, and farmer don't have the vocabulary to articulate this in highfalutin', dispassionate tones. But they can understand that while they are slaving away at work, the person buying their rice is getting something for nothing. And that something is to a nontrivial extent coming directly out of their hide (in the form of taxes or monetary dilution).

This is why the passive voice isn't so helpful here - "paying an unconditional basic income" takes away the role of agency. The state is taxing citizens and forcing them to provide services to people who aren't producing anything in return ("unconditional").

Different people have different definitions of justice, but many of those citizens will leave once they understand what is going on. After all, you would leave a company structured like that, which diluted down your equity or awarded an unconditional salary to the flagrantly unproductive. And so you would leave a country structured like that.

And when people of this sort leave en masse, there is no shopkeeper, truck driver, or rice farmer where the "guaranteed income" can be spent.
> I think wmf is right to point out that what the OP is talking about is a proprietary, as-yet unducmneted video codec

Is it? They haven't yet officially announced any details of that nature that I can see. Unless I missed that part?

> Surely the inevitable outcome of such things is to concentrate power, rather than decentralize it.

If it is in fact proprietary, then that is not great. But, that it shows that a downloadable codec can be comparable to a builtin one is more important than this specific codec. If they can do it, others can too.

And if their proving it is possible opens up a new industry of downloadable codecs, that run in all web browsers regardless and on all OSes, then that sounds like something good.

Because it's compared to the H.264 world where no open source browser can ship the codec. And sadly soon with EME we will have DRM in HTML that again, cannot be shipped by any open source browser. Whereas if the codec is downloadable - just another website - then both of these problems are averted.

I agree with you that we should and must consider the broader social implications. It seems to me that this product has positive potential there. But again, it is far too soon - we don't have enough technical details nor enough legal details.
Their incentive is getting even more money, so they can buy more than food and shelter.

Also, self fulfillment.

Throwing around words like "Communism" is not productive. It would be better if you only mentioned specific negative aspects.
My opinions are opposite yours. (except facebook, which I do not use)

Youtube has a functional layout for my purposes, particularly in find videos of my subscriptions, after a user style modification or two, youtube can really shine.

but GNOME?

Want dontzap off? "No one actually wants that!"
Want compose keys? "No one actually wants that!"
Want your computer to stay on when you close the lid? "No one actually wants that!"
want to hide the top bar? "No one actually wants that!"
want to move the top bar? "No one actually wants that!"

There were some good choices made, yes, but GNOME also chose to removing functionality. Then it chose to provide no alternatives because it threatened their brand. GNOME 3's motto should of being "No one actually wants that!"
When I read about the sound barrier I got lost in the amount of things that can be learned.

One being that it isn't just a simple thing speed up an airplane to faster than we have before. They have different designs because the air acts differently as the speed changes and doesn't function the same. Seeing how the shape (overall but especially the nose) changes for each type is pretty cool.

A lot of the articles get linked off here if you have an interest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersonic
Nobody knows what he works for. I mean mining.
Is it for good things or not.
That's the summary.
Also in this article that seems sensible to me. Spending on higher quality foods, medicine, sewing machines, blankets, savings, starting businesses and even the occasional "luxury" like a TV or wedding.

"... in villages receiving payments, people spent more on eggs, meat and fish, and on healthcare. Children’s school marks improved in 68% of families, and the time they spent at school nearly tripled. Saving also tripled, and twice as many people were able to start a new business."

"...one showed the sewing machine she had saved for over a year to buy, another proudly announced she had nearly finished paying for her family’s television set, and another held up a 300-rupee blanket for the winter, of far better quality than the one it replaced..."

Sounds like overall they are responsible about what they spend on.
How does computer boot up?
That explanation doesn't really explain how the coins are mined, but it I guess for a 7 year old, that explanation should be good enough.
According to the chart they'd have you make your first sale in Q3. Why would you wait that long to validate your business model? Incorporating and setting up a location should be one farther down the list.
TLDR: Gmail, my favorite email program, rolled out the "new compose experience" and then forced everyone to change to it, and everything about it sucks.
What about the kill switch? http://www.loper-os.org/?p=1009
If only one person has a security camera, his buddy can go in the room and mess with the money, and he can splice in fake footage so no one finds out.
Nonsense?!

Outputting text to be interpreted as code is far more low level and error prone than targeting an AST via an API like LLVMs.

And you loose a lot of high quality tooling that you could take advantage of.
Poor people=people without money. Give poor people money. Then they are less poor. Radical.
I don't know what his definition of anything is. I happen to agree with you. The example I pasted above was just from my only experience working with a C AST. In that case I wanted to input C code and then write out a transformed version of it.
No, she used the distortion to decode the specific subcarrier that holds the RDS information. This had nothing to do with the decryption, as the data decoded at this step would include regular RDS/RDBS data along with the _encrypted_ TMS data.

The decryption is performed in a second step. The reason she had to do it this way is because most radios do not provide a convenient way to get at the subcarrier data.
Don't forget that it comes out of the excess of those who do decide to work. I'm not confident that if this was rolled out globally, there would be enough people who really decide to "make something of their lives" to support the system. Sure, a lot of them will hate themselves if they don't, but, honestly now, how often does that stop laziness? Don't look at yourself to answer, look at the culture.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: anonymity online and encrypted communications are one of the most important problems we're going to going to face in the coming decades. Hackers should be working on those, not clever ways to serve ads or geolocating your latest locally-sourced coffee.

If you don't believe the US is already permanently archiving vast swaths of communication, it's not a big leap of imagination to picture it happening in five or ten years. Likewise the government might not have the computer power to analyze those archives today, but in five or ten years, I'd bet on it.

Some people don't mind that the government stores their emails. "I'm fine with it because I know they're going to catch the bad guys" or "I'm fine with it because I have nothing to hide". Those are certainly powerful (though flawed) arguments for the situation today. Those people are perhaps picturing filing cabinets in some dank warehouse filled with paper printouts of their emails, which due to space constraints will be shredded or forgotten in ten years. The reality is that thanks to technology, what we say today is being stored and archived for-ev-er and can be indexed and retrieved easily and indefinitely. Why does that make a difference? Because today, what you say and do might be lawful. But laws and societies change over time, and the government will still be able to go back and dig up what you said decades ago and use it against you.

That's really what scares me--because today, I, like most people, don't have much to hide. But who knows what laws or culture will be like in 20 years, and what can be used against me that I said so very long ago? Can you imagine working at the WTC and having a bad day, and jokingly sending an email to a coworker about bombing the place because you're so mad. 9/11 happens a year later, the government looks in its archives for the email you sent, and in a post-9/11 frenzy sends you to Guantanamo to "await trial". Or it doesn't even have to go that far; some government spokesperson lets your name slip in an interview as a "suspect" and the media attention you'll get will forever ruin your life even if the government does nothing.
"Before you can run anything make sure you have GLib 2 and the Boehm-Demers-Weiser garbage collector installed."

Wow, that's a pretty skimpy list of dependencies. But..

"Make sure you're using Leiningen 2."

..argh, installing that on ubuntu that requires 110 packages. All that just for a build system?
I completely disagree. I've learned a lot from natural salesmen and marketers, and have improved on both fronts due to learning from their battlefield stories.
If you build your platform on another platform; You're inevitably going to have a bad time. I don't use Path so I don't know how much of a blow this is to their platform, but it can't be good. Hopefully, Path has enough traction that it can grow without $FB's social graph.
I always found it strange that VST knobs were actually sliders in disguise. After a while you get used to it, but I can see how confusing it might be to users.
If you just want a disk sitting around with the Internet on it, check out Common Crawl (http://commoncrawl.org/).
This isn't an attack, it's just using the cheap FM radio and a sound card like a software-defined radio.
Indeed, I created the original "letsmake/bettertogether" site and posted it here on HN around December 2012. It went to the front page, and I was hired by GitHub in 2013.

A few Hubbers did see the site, but that is, of course, half the story, and I can honestly say that that wasn't the reason I got hired. I did also send in a resume weeks earlier, which did also get seen. It was the right place, the right time, and the right skills.

I would suspect--and this is just my opinion--that anyone attempting to create a site to highlight suggestions won't impress anyone. It worked once, and you'll need your own way to stand out. Uniqueness is what's valued here, not number of HN points or comments.

I'm going to mark my repo as Private to discourage copycats. I apologize for that.
Fyodor of Nmap did something similar, the talk from Defcon is pretty funny and informative.

http://nmap.org/presentations/BHDC08/
Boston has an undeserved liberal reputation. Boston is extremely conservative, but in its own way. It's NPR-liberal, not fun loving socially open liberal, and definitely not San Francisco liberal. It's ideologically liberal but not culturally so.

It took me a year or two to wrap my mind around it as it's a sort of conservatism you just don't find elsewhere in the U.S. much. It took me aback. I had no conceptual framework to place it in. Eventually I realized it was an upper-crust blue blooded Ivy League thing, a bizarre hybrid where people are intellectually open minded but socially unbelievably reserved.

Coming from "that kind" (solidly middle-class economically, but culturally/intellectually what you described) I think that there is a fear in us of the impractical. We have a 400-year memory of weird religious fantasies, failed dreams, and dangerous frontiers. We are quite liberal, but also very cautious and it's bred into us. When someone tells us that he's gone "poly" and that he's quite fine with his "open relationship" (initiated by his more alpha girlfriend) we roll our eyes and see someone who got played. We have 400 years of experience with concepts far more impractical than that.

Also, we generally don't like taxes. We're fine with money going to important social programs (e.g. universal healthcare) of obvious value, but we're fiscally prudent and when we can't see where every dollar goes, it makes us suspicious.

Intellectually, I'm about as anti-conformist as it gets. But on some level, I feel like there are rules and traditions and boundaries that have some value. What I especially hate are powerful people (the current elite, who've eclipsed us, and who've outdone us economically by orders of magnitude by their willingness to associate with distasteful money, e.g. oil despots) who seem to have taken all the bad of our traditions (e.g. our haughtiness and faith in hierarchy) and thrown away the good (our respect for education and human dignity, our progressivism, our flair for the written word).

We are (as noted) terrible, as a set, at keeping in contact. This is probably why people perceive it as being hard to make friends in Boston. We will still consider a person a friend if we haven't seen him for 10 years... but we also tend to go 10 years without being in contact, which is a shame. We also go out of our way to be kind to people we barely know... but we're not exactly warm. This aloofness is certainly one of the northeastern traits I have that I don't like.
As pointed out by msvan, the quote is actually by Xunzi.
Here is the original text in Chinese:

不闻不若闻之，
闻之不若见之，
见之不若知之，
知之不若行之；
学至于行之而止矣

I know what you are thinking `Why would you post something in Chinese? How could non-Chinese speakers understand?' and the reason is I want y'all to check out this super cool add of for Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/perapera-kun-... With this plugin, the meanings of the words show up onmouseover and you can pretty much get the meaning.
"more ... error prone"

Can you prove that? If not, it's just a baseless opinion.
That's a good point. When I think over what I use Perl for in practice, it's usually some form of text processing. Perl is just the swiss army knife of I/O munging.
Check out: http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/tell...
it has a bunch of translations and transliterations of this quote.
Niall Ferguson's response - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22417231
It's an attack on the 'system' (i.e. the money making system) ;)
How does this compare to Chicken Scheme?
You can skip the "money as a signal" argument and still get that it's not fair. But don't the rice farmer and store keeper get the same thing, plus what they make from their business? That's how I've always imagined this sort of thing.
I love this line:

Some people are incensed by “hoarders” – not I. I don’t give a damn. At least Bitcoin hoarders never had to kill anyone to obtain their wealth, unlike those who control land and other natural resources.
This program could change more lives than (gasp!) Facebook. Radical.
These people applied to go to Mars
>Does he think that it's technically more powerful? Again he should be able to prove that if that's the case. Otherwise he's just giving a shitty opinion, and should say that.

It's not like it's some controversial opinion what he said -- it's both self evident and common place. It's you who offers the more controversial opinion (and in a rude way, to top).

>I think the claim is nonsense because with inline assembler there is nothing that you cannot express in C that you can with LLVM. So the decision between the two is opinion.

It's not about "expression", and nobody argued that you can express more in LLVM.

This is missing the point by miles!

It's about having more structure and less of an ad-hoc pipeline, which helps with better tooling, error prevention, etc.

(Not only what you wrote is wrong, but even if the original argument was about expression, your opinion would still be wrong. Two things offering equivalent expressive power, does not mean that they are just as good to use in practice at all. Might as well ask "why invent new languages, when assembly can express everything").

The only benefit to using C for something like this is portability, which is something else altogether.
Yes, it doesn't sound sensible. But you are already biased by the situation presented. But look at it from a perspective of a Indian instead of just a poor person.

In India, plenty of social standing comes from willingness to spend on lavish events/customs - like weddings - to entertain friends, family, guests.

So, there is value. Of the social type.

That's the problem with many current social welfare systems - the poor are dictated by the types of aid is given to them. We rather have an overhead of up to billions of dollars obsessing over procedures, checks, regulations etc to ensure "unacceptable" outcomes do not occur.

And in there is the tendency for corruption, fraud, etc.
Thanks for that link. I read it and tried for an embarrassingly long time to write a coherent reply, but apparently can't do it. Megan Mcardle's blend of ideology and snark is like reverse catnip to me. If I were a cat, or something. Fortunately it's still gorgeously sunny here; I'm gonna go outside and atone for my foolishness by being happy.

I had no idea that the question Why can't Walmart treat its workers better, since Costco has proved it possible was not only a thing, but mature enough in the lifecycle of thingness for Mcardle to write an entire piece about how much it annoys her. I just arrived at it from observation in the stores. Well, that plus an article or two about Costco.