skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> [murder]

Again, you are making a bizarre claim (that laws against murder do not constitute requirements that people should not commit murder) and provide nothing to back this up. You need to show that this is actually how laws are interpreted by the judiciary, not just give your own amateur legal opinion.

> Every conditional moral imperative...is an application of a general moral imperative (categorical imperative according to Kant).

That's not what I mean. I'm talking about a general moral imperative whose logical form is that of a conditional sentence. E.g. "If your society has laws, obey them." There is actually no such thing as a "conditional imperative" in Kant's system (were you thinking of hypothetical imperatives?) See the following (p. 293 first complete paragraph) for an explanation of why something with the form of a conditional sentence isn't necessarily a hypothetical imperative:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=GBzrg47sxBwC&lpg=PA291&ots=t...

The irony here is that Kant didn't think that people had a right to break the law or rebel against the government!

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2707741?uid=3739464&ui...

In any case, I'm not a Kantian, so I don't really care whether his ethical theory has this consequence or not.
Personally, I feel more gratified after working hard and increasing my ability/achievements than doing drugs.. Perhaps I haven't done the right drugs (though I've done my fair share)? I've never had something happens where the world suddenly made sense, nor have I felt some spiritual connection with the cosmos or my soul. I feel that the one true way to understand myself and the world is to live in it unaltered.
If you get an interviewer who is using you as material to feel smug, I take that as a solid sign that the company is not a good one to work for.

I've had a long enough career that I can draw some conclusions about my work experiences. The trick questions designed to be extremely difficult to answer correctly under pressure are negatively correlated with a good working environment.

One of the best, most challenging jobs I had, and with the best set of engineers is one where I got interviewed by the president of the (small) company, he asked me no technical questions and told me I had the job at the end of the interview (I guess you can be fast when you're the president). I don't mean to say he didn't ask me about programming, he did, he asked me quite a lot about it, but no "how do you solve this problem" or "write code that does this" type questions. More, "how do you feel about language X and why?" type stuff.
Americans have been 'larger' for some time. We had trouble with AK47s after WW2, for example, because they were too small for the comparatively larger American soldiers to wield comfortably.

I don't think it's any more complicated than the fact that we eat more food for all of our lives.
I think the author's suggestion is TOO extreme. As in, you don't even want to waste $500 on Gnomon videos. These videos are not good at all. Go pick up a box of Ticonderoga #2 pencils and any ruled notebook from walmart.

These are the required tools in order to become a superior traditional artist.
Who in this thread is arguing for PRISM? Certainly that's not what Dr. Lessig is asking for either.
Yes, everyone who disagrees with you is brainwashed. That's a real healthy attitude to take.
Are you sure he's not making a joke as well?
Why Germany Should Offer Snowden Asylum
My Hdmi doesn't seem to work on my pi anymore. Should I get a new one?
A small typo in the title: Javascript and not java script.
This made me smile. Why stop with the the man made golf courses; why not raise questions about allowing cities to expand to require monstrous man made dams blocking rivers to create lakes like Mead and Havasu (if you're not familiar w/ the environmental loss that is the Hetch Hetchy reservoir it's worth looking into). I get the economic benefits of damming up rivers for power, predictable water supplies, and flood control... it fuels economies which helps people earn more (I benefited from TVA and have read about what it was like in the Tennessee valley before TVA; I'm glad TVA exists even w/ all of its flaws)... but I still found it amusing that you picked one specific sign of the success of these programs to complain about.
"it's becoming cheaper to start a startup, and startups are becoming a more normal thing to do"

The number of good startups will grow with the number of overall startups.
And if you did see that, you were damn lucky to be born at just the right time to see it before you get annihilated by the oncoming intelligent matter transformation.
They're related in the sense that the type of gameplay changes and unfolds as you progress.

Frog Fractions is much more linear, I suppose. You move from one game type to the next, instead of having multiple in parallel.
You're right. And it'll definitely have to be looked into (I haven't looked into it yet to be honest). The main issue I have with the NSA debacle isn't the act, which you could argue is mainstream, it's the procedures. It should require a warrant to even access someone's data. It should never be monitored of stored without suspicion, and it should be left to a court warrant in plain view not in a secret court.

Going with that, I'll have to research our procedures up here.
Your Facebook button says "Like", but it's a share. There's no liking involved.
I actually agree with this article...from an optimization standpoint. Whenever I've had to integrate paypal, youtube, or even coinbase...I always add the images to my static sprite sheet (to reduce http requests), and will serve a post href link...instead of button code suggested.

Even before the whole tracking was exposed, I always hated paypal's 1px blank gif that is integrated in their button code.
> However that has nothing to do with whether we should attempt to control NSA dragnet surveillance with technology after the fact

It's almost like there was a reason I explicitly disclaimed NSA when I made the point you responded to.

Even besides the IRS, what about FBI, local law enforcement, ATF, Border Patrol, and all of those other Federal agencies that have arrest powers? Should the local Good ol' Boy sheriff be able to pull up your record in NCIC with no audit trail?
The biggest problem with GM is it puts the world's food production into the hands of a select few multinational companies.

Companies like Monsanto have already shown they are prepared to fight hard to keep control their GM monopolies:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/monsanto-gmo-roundup-ready-se...
That recognition will no doubt come sooner the less value can be extracted from snooping.
Yes Kickstarter is constantly trying to explain to people they aren't a store, but most hardware projects use it as one anyway. And yes, if you buy on Kickstarter there is no guarantee you will ever receive anything. There have been fairly high profile Kickstarter hardware projects that never delivered. Having said that, this one looks like a pretty good bet to ship, the makers are very engaged and obviously have working models that are pretty far along. Granted, mass production is harder than most people assume, but I'd bet on this one shipping.
Right now, VCs often knowingly invest too much money at the series A
stage. They do it because they feel they need to get a big chunk of
each series A company to compensate for the opportunity cost of the
board seat it consumes. Which means when there is a lot of competition
for a deal, the number that moves is the valuation (and thus amount
invested) rather than the percentage of the company being sold. Which
means, especially in the case of more promising startups, that series
A investors often make companies take more money than they want.

Seems like this is a plausible explanation of what happened to Color (http://www.crunchbase.com/company/color-labs)?

Also, I rather enjoyed reading:

Which means the first VC to break ranks and start to do series A
rounds for as much equity as founders want to sell (and with no
"option pool" that comes only from the founders' shares) stands to
reap huge benefits.

As I always thought the big, required option pool that so heavily diluted founders/early employees was a bit out there. Seems much more sane to practice JIT dilution.
i hear Pi isn't very good for routers/firewalls as it's a USB NIC. i was hoping to pfSense it up, too!
Interesting article

As an outsider, it was surprising to me that seed investors don't have access to a company's revenue numbers. I would think there would be some kind of quarterly report that goes to all investors.
Art doesn't transfer well over any medium. That's why there are thousands upon thousands of Art School students that are not producing art after Art School. They go into different fields. You can't teach someone to become an artist in 4 years. For some people, you won't be able to teach them ever, not even in a 25-year rigorous art school program.
Thanks, changing it now.
Equate? Sure, they aren't equal. For instance I'd much rather be a passenger in a car with a driver who's had a regular, cup of coffee-sized dose of caffeine than with someone that's even had a little bit of LSD.

OTOH LSD seems to be non- or low- addictive but coffee will get you hooked and give you withdrawals.

They're all mind altering drugs. Each thing is different. Some find value in them that others don't.
"it's becoming cheaper to start a startup, and startups are becoming a more normal thing to do"

You can now start a company with a few hundred dollars. All that's left is food and rent. This is the first time in history when this has been possible.
EU Officials Furious at NSA Spying in Brussels and Germany
It's purely anecdotal -- and occasional -- but I've felt less and less ability to (easily) control my search results in Google by (simply) adjusting my search term.

I add some keywords (would that I could still use + for its original purpose), but the top results continue to be filled with worthless, often spammy crap. Pages and pages of crap.

Your comment is encouragement to give DDG another go, and to take time to familiarize myself with its !
Any reason why the aspect ratio is off?
I don't feel these semantic distinctions are as distinct as all that. And they're not the same for everyone. I had a coworker who reported distinct euphoria from over-the-counter Motrin.

So, semantics aside... I have two daughters myself. Personally I'm fine with them using mood/perception altering substances in a responsible manner. Or not, according to their druthers.

The thing is, some substances have effects that go beyond the timeframe of any possible pharmacological effect. To have the experience of seeing things "fresh" as if through the eyes of a child is to know, experientially, that such a thing is possible as an adult. Truly knowing it's possible, one might occasionally make the effort to just look and experience, with fewer filters than is typical. This is a real and beneficial ability. Drugs are not the only way to get there, but they are one way.
The "aha" moment for me, as an outsider to this industry, is using a special shoe to reduce friction and increase lateral stability versus only focusing on developing a 3D treadmill itself.
In regards to not tracking users...integrating a http request to Google for JQuery, is still tracking users.

I always find this ironic about these articles don't track your users, or prism is watching, let's use mailvelope, some of these pages that is promoting privacy, integrates google analytics, have a share button, or some type of off server request.
The host country has the accept his arrival. After this wealthy individual bribed the FSB to let go of Snowden.
I think it would be sad. I wouldn't laugh, even though I find Booz Allen distasteful. Intrusions of this sort are criminal for good reason. In the most likely case, the net effect would be more 18-28 year olds being prosecuted for felonies, while a chorus of message board ghouls cheers more people like them on.
Good luck with that. What makes the Occulus Rift important is how fast it translates real world movement to signals software can process to give a true VR feel. The accelerometers and magnetometers in phones are decent for their intended purpose, but their intended purpose is not VR. This is no Rift killer.
You seem to read only the lines that you can creatively contort to validate your belief and ignore the rest. I don't think you are intentionally doing this, but it seems quite apparent that it is happening anyway from my vantage point. The Google comments mention user data in addition to the servers themselves, and many of the comments refer to surveillance in general.

If the media claims turn out to be true nobody is going to think "Oh, Google was telling the truth the whole time!" As I mentioned, there is no practical difference between this statement being "true" in the sense that you creatively "read" it and an outright lie. No reasonable person would read these statements in the way that you have.

You seem to be having a really hard time simultaneously holding the idea that the media reports are correct and the idea that Google/the big tech industry is trustworthy, hence the mental gymnastics. You're going to have to drop one of those two ideas. You will eventually.
Ask HN: Why does the Bay Area strongly defend widerspread surveillance?
Some of the the most argument defenders are from the Bay Area.

First, we have Dianne Feinstein who is the former mayor of San Francisco. Next we have Nancy Pelosi, the local representative of San Francisco, who is defending it as well. Then comes Barbra Boxer, another representative from the Bay Area, who is supporting the other two in this fight.

I want to believe Google. I want to believe Facebook. I want to believe YC. But when their headquarters is located next door to some of the most argent defenders, I'm not sure I can trust them.
> It's a question of limits, and of degrees of intrusion.

Great point. Honestly, my biggest issue with this is the secret nature of the FISA court and the near 100% approval for warrants.

You NEED to have watchdogs for the watchers. You can't simply have massive ABC orgs having all of this information unchecked like it is now.

The cat is out of the bag however. We can't simply stop using our technology, the question is like what you said: regulation and discussion of how to use this technology.
"[5] This trend is one of the main causes of the increase in economic inequality in the US since the mid twentieth century. The person who would in 1950 have been the general manager of the x division of Megacorp is now the founder of the x company, and owns significant equity in it."

What economic evidence is there to support this claim about the causes of economic inequality?
"I see it says here you're an [particular platform] programmer? Ok, have you ever worked with [particular SDK]? Oh, you have, ok what are the parameters to [arbitrary method in said SDK with over 6 parameters]"

This is an actual question I got. I don't consider it weeding out people to keep them honest. I had worked with that SDK, I might have even used that particular API (though it was not a common one in the area I was working with that SDK).

Here's the error I think. These problems do not ask the candidate to demonstrate their problem solving capability. They ask the candidate for a solution, and they are often presented in such a way as to imply that's all the interviewer wants to hear: He expects you to just rattle off a solution.

I don't think "seeing how the candidate thinks about problems" is very useful. Either someone can reason about the problem, or they can't. When you ask them a trick question like this ("find loops in a linked list" was one I used back before I learned how to interview people) they either can solve it fairly easily or they can't.

If they are constantly stuck, you have no information about their programming ability.

I think that's the error. People think that "getting stuck" means they are poor at problem solving. (and rarely, possibly never, has an interviewer asked me questions relevant to understanding how I solve problems.)

The pressure of an interview session, combined with the fact that most interviewers are not really all that competent at problem solving in the first place (about %50 of the time they ask the problem wrong and then have to change it while I'm solving what they actually asked, or what they asked is nonsensical) means that you get a lot of false negatives.

I'm self employed now so I write software all day long. I am constantly solving my own problems. I've been doing this for decades. Still you put me in an interview and ask me to sort a linked list, and I'll be spending %50 of my energy trying to get over the fact that the interviewer seems to expect me to just blurt out an answer. (even though I know they want to see me solve the problem).
"This trend is one of the main causes of the increase in economic inequality in the US since the mid twentieth century. The person who would in 1950 have been the general manager of the x division of Megacorp is now the founder of the x company, and owns significant equity in it."

Boy, is this a load of bollocks. I guess the 20th century war against socialism ("the means of production in the hands of those who work it") and worker's organizations and parties doesn't come much into play into these analyses. Up to the bickering a few months ago in Wisconsin with Walker - although we're so far down the road, that example isn't very useful as a specific case.

Yes, the entrepreneurial middle manager starting his own business, this is the source of income inequality! Meanwhile, half the Forbes 400 inherited their way onto the list. Where's the plucky entrepreneur in that equation? Even "self-made" people like Warren Buffett had a congressman father and a grandfather with a chain of stores. Not exactly a guy pulling himself up by his bootstraps.

I mean, the fact that this speech was made to investors is a signal. Not the tone, but the fact that it's investors who are the ones who sit and hear these things. The programmer in the trenches, working 50-60 hours a week creating wealth is not a part of these decisions on production.

There's a good documentary called "Born Rich" that is on Youtube right now. I would recommend people watch it. This is who the money goes to, not the plucky, hard-working entrepreneur. Blogs are filled with stories of angels and VCs backstabbing founders. As is HN. And the founders usually get the best deal in the company, far better than schlub programmers. Even hackers of the caliber of Jamie Zawinski have attested to this.

This idea of income inequality happening because some hard-working founder gets all of the money is a complete farce. Propaganda even.

If we want to really get into a discussion of this - just who are the "limited partners" the VCs are raising money from, and where did they get their money? We always see a fresh-faced Mark Zuckerberg or Drew Houston, or a Paul Graham or even a Ron Conway, or John Doerr or Michael Moritz. But who are the limited partners they're raising money from? Who is calling the shots on how money gets spent?
Exactly. Once Google beat it, no need to keep the corpse around. Not sure what Yahoo could do. Their own search had already surrendered.
You're creating a false dichotomy to try to force your beliefs into the argument.

The idea of a soul is supernatural so the default naturalist/atheist position is to give it no more thought than unicorns or leprechauns (although this is not universally true; some believe in something analogous to a soul, but with far more complex reasoning than "God did it") in a meaningful debate. Instead the atheist/naturalist world view looks for other natural causes for consciousness and very easily finds them: the depth and breadth of complex phenomena emerging from smaller cells (chemical, biological, and informational) is astounding, so much so that we haven't even begin to scratch the surface of the neuroscience, let alone the complex phenomena that emerge from societies and an interconnected global civilization.
It will be interesting to see if VCs take Pauls advice. Recently a lot of VCs have been offering value add services like design expertise and recruiting. I hope they also include quick decisions and less dilution.

Why does it take some VCs so long to make a decision? Ron Conway makes a decision to fund a founder within 10min of meeting them.
You are correct. We can determine what an object is made out of or at least behaves like based on the reflected EM waves. Every piece of matter has an associated electric permittivity and permeability. These can, and often do, change with temperature and the other environmental variables.
Evolutionary reasons keep us surviving at any cost - in this discussion the cost is the sacrifice of appreciation of the beauty of everything, etc. Indeed you might die to predators more if you were distracted by how pretty that tree trunk is, but that reasoning no longer applies since we are not part of the food chain. You seem to be using what evolution "settled on" as support for your argument - that is a very wrong thing to do.
"The full methodology isn't actually published anywhere."

I believe it is: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67.... Is a panel of experts providing views on an objective criteria the most satisfying solution? No. But they are open about the method, the scoring system, and data used to set assumptions. Plus, it beats "experts" legislating based on subjective, opaque critera.

"The rankings are creating by combining a lot of different factors that don't have anything to do with each other, e.g. by combining harm to the user with harm to society"

Nutt et all advocate considering the harm done to society by drugs, versus individuals, since it is at the society-wide level that we regulate. In any case, the data are provided to allow for one to pry apart the local and global harms. Here is a chart allowing you to, visually, do just that: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_caus....

"The harms for drugs are measured as they are typically used, rather than correcting for things like differences in demographic and route of administration."

In his book, he spends a good deal of time addressing routes of administration, pointing out that "the health impacts of a drug can vary enormously depending on how it’s consumed". He is similarly expansive on the role of "setting" and culture in vulnerability and harm potential.

"The harms of the drugs caused by prohibition are not accounted for."

I thought he went quite extensively into the War on Drugs and how it wasn't "obviously the wrong thing to try in the 1970s, but today it is clearly doing more harm than good", that the "'drugs problem' needs radical rethinking as a public-health crisis rather than a moral crusade." He also uses the example of Portugal to show how legalisation can reduce indirect drug harms.

"They're not accounting for the benefits of drug use, only the harms."

Nutt is presently at the forefront of the British effort to de-regulate drugs. Further, harm reduction should first focus on clarifying risks.
Another note: you can create realistic share buttons by fetching the Like counts via JavaScript.

I run that on my own website and it works well.
I'd highly recommend not reading such nonsense that has no scientific backing. That book is just the author making up explanations, with no evidence. It doesn't "show" anything, at least not more than any other user making up stuff about their favourite drug.
By pandering, do you mean actually form an argument instead of expecting people to accepted the Truth you've revealed?
I'm studying at The Open University and it's really good: http://www.open.ac.uk/