skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "Set points" assumes that we are dealing with an automatic system.

We are dealing with an automatic system. If we weren't, people would starve or become morbidly obese whenever they moved or changed jobs such that they were walking a different amount. Or when the restaurant down the street closed and they switched to a different one. Most people's weight stays remarkably consistent over the years despite significant changes in calorie consumption and energy expenditure. The reason that happens is (a) your resting metabolism speeds up if you eat more or slows down if you eat less, (b) your subjective sense of "being hungry" - your inclination to eat - adapts to your metabolic needs, (c) your inclination to be active adapts too.

People who are obese tend to be in the situation that their automatic system wants to keep them that way. Whether they "pay attention" or not, fighting that system is HARD. It's hard enough that we don't have reliable advice on how to do it. We have crappy advice that mostly doesn't work. People can lose some weight for a limited period of time, but they generally can't lose all the weight they want to (ever) or keep off the weight they do lose for as long as three years.

Most weight-loss studies don't follow people for long enough - 6-month studies tend to show just about every diet "working". But the studies that run long enough do see the weight come back. Almost everyone gets the weight back, from every diet.

Remember the "thin" version of Oprah Winfrey? Oprah is worth 2.8 billion dollars. She was hugely motivated to lose weight. She has a dedicated staff - a personal trainer, a private chef, access to every type of medical advice and equipment and treatment imaginable. If SHE can't keep weight off for more than 6 months at a time, what chance do ordinary shmucks have?
While "falsification" is impossible for complex models, the predictive power of a model can be shown to be inadequate. It takes years for it all to play out, but it's still science.

Economics is far worse since we have such a poor understanding of psychology.
I'm confused, again. Don't we subpoena people all the time just because they are associated with the subject of an active investigation? That's literally Law Enforcement 101.

Do you think they didn't bother to search the available records for close associates of a Mob boss under investigation for racketeering? That they just wiretap the one guy and that's all?
Why you lose a pound of weight at night in your sleep
A quasi-polynomial algorithm for discrete logarithm
"The U.S. Supreme Court gives exceptionally wide latitude in what counts as a lawful order, and as far as I know no servicemember has ever been tried (much less convicted) for following a valid order (even if they thought it was illegal)."

Yes, exactly. And of course, there have been many examples of soldiers who were court-martialed for disobeying orders. The risk of disobeying is on the soldier -- they're taking their life in their hands when they make the decision to cross a superior. It's not as if the military says: "oh, you thought that order was illegal? We won't court-martial you, then."

The parent comment was totally specious, because Snowden is being treated exactly the way any soldier would be treated for a similar behavior. We don't just automatically pardon people for breaking laws because they broke laws with patriotic intent.
You seem to be presuming absolute corruption on the part of the legal system and absolute innocence on the part of Edward Snowden. What would you expect to happen, under these circumstances?
His failure to register it means he can't sue them for damages either; at most he can obstruct their acquisition of trademark status. A fine example of why startups should have a legal strategy as well as a technical one, a marketing one, and so on.
Even leaving behind the arguments that Apple was incorrect on iMessage history being inaccessible to them, what about the rest of Apple's services (like all your icloud email, your contacts, calendar, etc) that certainly can be turned over with a warrant?

Your conclusion does not follow.
I wonder if they could spin up the tires before they hit the tarmac on landing? Think about it: the landing gear tires go from 0 rpm to spinning rapidly enough to carry the plane going about 140 mph in a fraction of a second. That puts the tire under enormous strain, which causes them to blow out all the time. A pre-landing spin-up system might be able to save a lot of petroleum by conserving synthetic rubber.
Here is a link to sign up for Stack Overflow Careers: http://bit.ly/14P2rbs
That's exactly the point aspensmonster was making by misquoting the amendment to make light of the rayiner's comment.
Ok, I definitely have a bias toward what the grandparent is saying: flatten the hierarchy.

But just from a logical standpoint, couldn't you apply the following equally to the Riak guy who is complaining: "arbitrarily changing parts of a software package without even trying to understand the consequences of those changes is madness"

It absolutely is madness. If the Riak guys want to use leveldb in a way Google won't support, they should rally with the package managers and get Google to stop being "pretend open source." (Hint, Google: just releasing the source doesn't work if you ignore all bug reports and patches from outside.)

I suspect the real issue here is too much "Not Invented Here" syndrome by all parties involved.
Not just that, most people will most likely just charge at home and use battery swaps as an absolute last resort or when they're on a long road trip. I'm sure the cost associated with a battery swap is not "cheap" (i.e. diffing your battery capacity versus the battery capacity of the new battery and multiplying that by the total cost of the new battery. You weren't thinking you can just roll into any 'ol battery depot and swap out your 5 year old Model S battery with a brand spankin' new one, right ;)?)
That's all fine, but in the meantime his business model has fallen apart and his opposition to the marketing firm has zero economic value. He can relaunch, most likely, but it's going to be a lot more expensive and time-consuming than filing for a mark in the first place would have been.
Pretty much all science lies on a spectrum from, say Math on one end, thru physics and biology and eventually psychology (say) on the other. You take the view that some sciences are OK and others not, but it's more nuanced.

The greenhouse effect is solid physics and experimentally falsifiable and verified. We can measure fluctuations in solar output. But sure, the system as a whole is horribly complex and we can't make precise predictions.

Just as a matter of common sense we know that pumping crap into the atmosphere is probably a bad thing -- we shouldn't need a rapidly impending crisis to persuade us to try to avoid doing it, but getting people to do or stop doing anything is politics, not science.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Hong_Kong

And there's the whole moratorium currently in place against extradition in HK right now, and they have a British-based judicial system that takes FOREVER (just like ours!), and have an exemption in their extradition treaties for political crimes. HK != PRC.
If only there were some adversarial process by which these issues could be decided....
And all other laws, if they choose to be.
AFAIK, other whistleblowers in the NSA have tried. The fact that it was all swept under the rug may have made Snowden consider a more rash course of action.
So... with the utmost respect, how cool is it that the glyphs for Inuktitut (if that's what those are) look just like some kind of awesome sci-fi writing.)
Ask HN: Is my Idea profitable? Hint: semantic web crawler for lyrics
Hey HN!

I was recently exposed to CasperJS and PhantomJS and I'm fascinated with these tools.

Last night I didn't sleep because I built a web crawler that crawls lyrics websites, and matches the lyrics to user generated content in songmeanings.com and lyricinterpretation.com.

Why? Because let's say I want to look for songs about socialization of government, my program is able to say:

"AWOLNATION - Jump on my shoulders"

My question is... is this a profitable idea?
He won't get any damages because he didn't file a trademark application of his own first. All he can do is obstruct the trademark being granted to them instead, then file his own application. The end.
The fact that the time it takes to sign a petition is worth more than the effect it will have is a good reason to not make your voice heard.
I am talking about normal every day usage Browsing, Youtube, Netflix, etc from multiple devices at home.

Maybe it is hardware as mention in other replies. I haven't done testing with different hardware.
You misunderstood the point the author made about erlang-base: it's not that he or she somehow installed Erlang without installing erlang-base, but rather that if in an Ubuntu system you try to run 'erl' before installing any Erlang packages at all, you receive a message telling you something like "to get the erl command install the package 'erlang-base'" and if you go and do that, you don't get the Erlang standard library! The point is that Ubuntu should either suggest 'erlang' instead, or not have all those separate tiny packages in the first place.
That would only be in the case of a government that represents the people and has their consent to govern.
...we could enshrine it in our constitution!
Elon explains that it was using the same machine as in the manufacturing factory.
Does not this D-notice gag order also apply to Guardian/Greenwald? What's up with that?
Looking up the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 [1] even more closely, it appears it won't apply to Snowden here. If the material is protected from disclosure by law or E.O. (like this was) then you can only report it to the Office of Special Counsel or the agency I.G. and receive whistleblower protection.

It's in fact arguable that things like PRISM even violated any of those provisions, which makes it risky (on a legal basis) to leak even if he wasn't in the intelligence community.

[1] http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c101:1:./temp/~c101m8S...:
Fair enough!!!! :)
An A320 burns about a half pound of fuel per second when taxiing. [1] So it seems plausible that the amount of weight you save on fuel could go a significant part of the way toward offsetting the weight penalty from carrying the extra motors.

I suppose if you're pushing the envelope precisely, and push back overweight, count on the taxi burn to get you down to max take-off weight, and plan to land with the legal minimum fuel reserve, then yeah, you'd still pay the full weight penalty. But I'm guessing that most airlines, as a policy, anticipate a range of possible taxi times in calculating their weight and fuel budgets, so significant weight savings should be realized.

[1] http://www.mit.edu/~hamsa/pubs/KhadilkarBalakrishnanGNC2011....
If the public sentiment sways in such a direction, I'm sure a technicality will be found in this case as well.
.exe was 'executable', but somehow a .com(mand) wasn't... executable? :)
Or you set up pkgsrc under /opt or /usr/pkg or some such, and use that for the software where you want newer versions than your distro provides.
Yes. Very easily. I suspect that well over half of jury-eligible people would consider him a traitor.
Suspend, leave emacs!?! Blasphemy and apostasy!
That 'go rouge' is a neat typo, it sounds much naughtier than going rogue.
Well aspenmonster's doing a poor job at it then. rayiner could be exactly right in his description of the specific fear that the Framers had which lead to them including that general protection into the Bill of Rights. In fact I would be surprised if rayiner wasn't correct on that there was a specific instance.

And rayiner never tried to claim the 4th Amendment says something different other than its actual text either. He simply explained why the actual text of the 4th Amendment was thought to be required, which can be helpful in court deliberations when trying to apply a vague law to a given case.
It's pointless to reference US law or an amendment to the Constitution. If that were relevant, none of these events would have occurred.
I believe the US air force did extensive studies on this back in the 60's and found that tire ware from spinup only accounted for ~<10% of overall wear on the tires. They found most of the stress comes from the act of braking and turning. Also I believe they found the gyroscopic effects of the spinning wheels actually made it more difficult to land the plane... although that may not be an issue anymore with modern avionics and autopilots.
Fallacy fallacy?
The fact that Holder and Obama chose to drop their charges into public view smack in the middle of the friday night news blackout shows that they lack confidence and feel weak in the face of negative public opinion.

We are entering into the seminal stages of a struggle for the 21st Century; will the future be defined by unaccountable power?

Will we all live in the Panopticon with the sole exception of the ODNI or whatever Cabal is the inner circle of the Intelligence Community?

Will the US (and the world) be ruled by secret laws negotiated as "trade treaties"; that give corporate organizations greater power than any legislature accountable to the citizenry?

Snowden's revelations are merely one set of secrets that we deserve to know. There many more, and every one of those secrets deserves exposure. We, the people of earth; deserve to know what is being done to us by our leaders.

When a government has so profoundly violated the people's trust as ours; questioning it's legitimacy is... legitimate.
I don't think the Constitution really made it into this century with us. Sad really. The footnotes and exceptions on the Bill of Rights due to executive orders is probably longer than the whole Constitution.
Normal protections apply (except possibly "near" the border, someone else will have to link to the outraged web sites)
Facebook Security Lapse Exposed Information On 6 Million Users
Pro-tip: don't just link your blog post, give us an executive summary. If you won't make the effort to do at least that, I wouldn't expect many to make the effort to click your link.
The second problem with these sorts of laws is that they never expire. Legislators are never forced to debate old laws, even if the laws no longer make sense.

Not actually true, lots of laws have sunset provisions built in. LAws are often repealed or overturned. New laws are typically passed because egregious situatiosn occur and there's not prosecutable under existing law. In the meantime, defendants rely on procedrualism as much as prosecutors do.

The growth and complexity of law is a problem, but misrepresenting the situation as people like Silverglate do (without ever explaining the legal philosophy behind how it came to be this way) leaves everyone worse off because they're just as ignorant as before.

The media loves this of course. That's why when government agencies ask for comment ias part of their rulemaking process (which requess for comments are published in the state or federal register, as all pro journalists know), the media hardly ever bothers to mention it ot the public until the deadline for comment sis looming, in order to create a false sense of urgency and an impression ofa government that doesn't give the people time to react to what's being done in their name.

We should live in a society where no reasonable person has to worry about whether or not they are breaking the law. That means we need our laws to expire periodically, so that we keep debating whether or not they make sense, and that means we need to not just pass laws every time someone happens that we do not like.

Suppose the statute on murder expired automatically every 10 years and had to be reauthorized. What makes you think it would not just be expanded every single time the review period came around? Switching out the legislative mechanism isn't going lead to a magical improvement in human psychology.
Awesome! thank you.
We're actually arguing about system boundaries now. In my experience, all arguments about the causes of overweight and obesity wind up as boundary disputes.

> People who are obese tend to be that way because their automatic system wants to keep them that way.

As a nitpick, people frequently read homeostasis backwards. While the body's systems can be characterised as a control system with some central governor pulling levers to keep it within certain boundaries, that's not really what happens. This appearance is actually an emergent phenomenon of interacting feedback loops. X goes down, so Y goes up. Y goes up, Z goes up. Z goes up, X goes up. X goes up, Y goes down ... and so on. Equilibrium is maintained in the long run by the summative effect of counter-acting reactions and feedback loops.

Set point theory is basically a way of saying that different folks have different appetites. When they eat ad libitum, some people eat more, some less. Their weight converges to the asymptote of TDEE that balances their diet and the increased BMR from additional weight.

This not news. The point though is that consciousness and self-awareness allows us to examine our actions and modify them. But first you must internalise the locus of control. You either accept that you are the only person who can control your weight, or you don't. Oprah is a perfect example, because by hiring trainers and cooks and so on, she can externalise control. It stops working when she gets bored and fires them. Or when she reaches her "goal weight" and, not realising that it needs to be a permanent change in behaviour, fires them.

The final problem with set-point theory is that it doesn't explain why there has been a sudden burst in overweight and obesity in the past few years in rich countries only. Calories consumed per capita does; so does the steady deflation of the rate calories-per-dollar exchange. People's appetites haven't changed. People probably always wanted the salty, fatty, sugary things. It's just that now is the first time in history that it has been massively abundant and cheap in wealthy societies.

> But the studies that run long enough do see the weight come back. Almost everyone gets the weight back, from every diet.

It's a common truism to say that "the weight comes back", and yet actually, that claim is not really supported either. The literature on long-term compliance is sparse and I suspect the waters muddied because when you perform a medically supervised diet, again the locus of control is external. HAES advocates rely on a single study performed in 1959. A single study.
Given that spying drastically shortened the war against Japan and appreciably shortened the war against Nazi Germany (both of which are definitely not on the Christmas list of UN human rights proponents), I'd be careful about how emotionally attached one gets to the issue of spying. Like many other things, it is a tool... it can be used for good or for bad, but in the end it's a tool nonetheless.
So, you're saying that it's actually easier to lose weight with a low-carb diet? Well, then, glad we agree.

As for the "calorie is a calorie" point of view, I recommend reading the following:

http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/do-calories-matter
Was waiting for someone to say this. They (Surf life saving Australia) teach the same here. I've only ever been involved in board or IRB rescues in real life but the old sea dogs say that it works wonders if they do grab into you: drop like a stone because the last thing a drowning person wants is to be attached to a person who is going under the water given their desperate struggle to keep their head up
Take care to notice the "if you think" part of that clause.
My OS does do it by default. It also provides me with a messaging system with end to end encryption by default.

The inconveniences can be removed by engineering - that's what we do. It's a matter of priorities and Google's are conflicted in this area.
Not in text. There are too few cues available to avoid Poe's law.
Perl and a hyphenation dictionary?
That hasn't seemed to stop the executive branch from pardoning people who have been charged but not convicted of anything. (Off the top of my head Marc Rich comes to mind, probably Nixon and a few others too)
What about the product itself is "junk science"? All you've said is that there are already similar products.
> "People under 30 are the only age group in which a clear majority (60%) says that the release of classified information about the NSA phone and email data collection program serves the public interest."

I wonder if that's because, as if often said, that the people in this age group have grown up in a time when posting your "private information" (including your activities, who you associate with, etc.) is the norm.

Many of the so-called "Facebook generation", for example, seem to not give a damn about the surveillance and spying (based upon my admittedly small sample size) that is being conducted. They are already accustomed to so much more of their "private" data being public -- many of them, in fact, are quite happy to make it public.
This changing station could well be inside such a tidy and enclosed area at the Tesla Station.
Honestly, outside of the crazy hyperbole leading up to the (terrible) movie, he wrote some good stuff on his old blog, and the assistant he mentions(Ryan holiday) wrote a fascinating book called trust me in lying.
My opinion about it is that it's ONE way for them to take the temperature of the people. Of course 100,000 signatures alone isn't going to create meaningful action but it does allow for a certain amount of visibility into what's bubbling up to the surface. Thus, it's valuable... just not as valuable as some hope it will be.
The charging documents (which should be public) will contain an affirmation/confirmation section that includes the prosecutor's name and signature.
I'm not saying I approve but the key word is "arbitrary". The USG would presumably say this isn't arbitrary interference as it's in the course of a criminal investigation.
The term used these days is "adaptive thermogenesis". You can browbeat it anyhow by sufficiently undercutting caloric intake that the body can't down-regulate enough to cover the deficit. A much safer and easier way to do it is either to use a moderate deficit (studies of athletes show that with identical exercise and identical protein intake, athletes on a 500kcal deficit retain more strength and lean mass than athletes on a 1000kcal deficit) and do exercise, at least some of it with weights.

There's also the "rebound effect", which the Minnesota Starvation Experiment gives us insight into.

People stop dieting and then resume ad libitum eating. They gain fat faster than lean tissue, because gaining fat is easier than gaining lean tissue. Net effect: BF% worsens compared to baseline.

The key is not that "diets don't work, look, they make you fatter"; rather, it's that people see diets as something you do once and then stop. What's actually necessary is ongoing control of food intake.
Google responds to DMCA takedown notices (scroll to bottom)
I have to fly to Singapore next week. I can bring some masks if you want. Can someone with familiarity with 3M products recommend which of these might be more suitable? http://www.3mdelivery.com/cid-85-name-r-no-1.html
It's an apt name. In the film "Soylent Green," soylent was just a line of meal-replacement rations. The green variety was the newest one released, and the one that happened to be made of humans.
That's not the key quote: that's the quote that reassures you. I've never taken global warming as gospel. I often read people making fun of the right for dismissing it but I never did, because even if they were against global warming because of their anti-intellectuality they might still be right in the end. The evidence of global warming, at least in the apocalyptic way that's been portrayed by some, has always seemed shaky to me.