skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why not just say the price here?
But his claim, that it is disputable, is quite weak and therefore trvially proves itself. By disputing it, he proves it can be disputed. You are seeking to resolve said dispute, which is also important but not exactly the same thing.
You didn't find a solution that met your precise needs, so you started building one. Don't let the fact that other solutions exist get you down.
Yup. Big difference observing an arbitrage opportunity, and executing it.
That question is equivalent to "describe an optimum ordering algorithm". What's so wrong with it?
Indeed. Every time someone jokes "It sounded better in the original German" I think of cases like these and think "It still does".
What do you mean "they're the state's children"?
I cannot agree with you here. Although I do not claim to be smart now, I am definitely farther along than when I was younger. And I hope to be working only because I enjoy it in about 9 more years, happy to be also looking forward to quite a bit of travel, as well as on-going self learning I already do...

I worked hard for the first 20 years, now I work part time, and as I said already, I hope to have it be optional soon. I also feel far more appreciative of life in general now, whereas I took much for granted while younger. Hopefully, that will continue to increase...

But now having typed this, I realize that we are all different, and the path we took is the path we had to take to be who we are...

Hmmm... Never mind?
And if it was, would you recommend tearing them down?

That was the point, if this is the main argument against home schooling then it is obvious there isn't just much to go on.
The simple description you'll find in most linguistic descriptions of Japanese is that the Japanese r is what is called an alveolar tap and written as [ɾ] in the International Phonetic Alphabet, which is also the Spanish r in pero (not the trilled r in perro). The reality is more complicated because Japanese only has one liquid phoneme. The fact that there is no separate l sound in Japanese means that there is a bigger phonetic space that the r sound can occupy. What ends up happening is that the Japanese r can be lateralized, that is, part of the airstream is through the sides of the tongue rather than through the middle of the mouth. A lateralized tap which results in this case is written as [ɺ]. This ends up sounding like l, which is technically known as a lateral approximant because the airstream is only through the sides of the tongue.

The more complete description of the Japanese r is that it is a tapped alveolar consonant that can range between a completely central [ɾ] and the lateralized [ɺ], with different degrees of lateralization. All will be interpreted as the Japanese r, and speakers tend to use [ɾ] after vowels, with lateralization likely to creep in if the r comes at the beginning of an utterance or after an n.

I'm a native speaker of Korean by the way, and while at the abstract phonemic level we also have a single l/r sound represented as ㄹ in the Korean alphabet, we do distinguish [ɾ] and [l] between vowels. 아리 ari uses the tap [ɾ] and 알리 alli uses [l] because that's how double ㄹ is pronounced. It's a similar distribution to the tapped and trilled r's in Spanish, where trilled r's between vowels can be analyzed as double r's.
It is also due to capping the profit on a contract. The only way to make more money is to enlarge the problem. Some general wants a gold-plated titanium feature? "YES SIR!" "Here is the change order for your signature, SIR!"

Yet if you don't cap the profit, there is incentive to cut corners. So you lose, or you lose.
While there are certainly companies that will not give bonus points for having once pursued an entrepreneurial path, I don't think entrepreneurship in and of itself is generally as problematic as it's made out to be here.

Constructive criticism: I think the author's difficulties are probably more about his overall positioning than his history of entrepreneurial pursuits. For better or worse, positioning can mean the difference between getting lots of job offers and getting none.

The first thing I noticed in looking at the author's LinkedIn profile, which is the first result when you Google his name, is that it tells me more about what he's done than what he has actually accomplished. That's not helpful because prospective employers don't just want to know where you've worked, they want to know what you've achieved. If I were the author, I would rewrite my job descriptions to focus on the tangible benefits realized by my contributions. Right now, I can't figure out what value the author has created for his companies/clients/employers because it's simply not described.

Also, certain red flags simply aren't likely to be overlooked. Examples of these red flags include:

1. No full-time roles.

2. A history of job hopping (i.e. most/lots of stints under 18-24 months)

3. Jobs with overlapping dates.

4. Unexplained gaps in employment history.

5. No discernible career "path" (i.e. being all over the place in terms of what you've done).

6. Lots of moving around (geographically).

7. Bizarre job titles.

8. Job title progression that is inconsistent with a traditional development path (i.e. a jump from an entry-level job title to a senior-level job title in less than a year is likely going to be questioned).

9. Public musings in which you paint yourself as financially strained, burnt out, confused, etc.

Obviously, you can not and should not lie about your work history, so when these sorts of red flags exist, there might not be an easy way to deal with them. But I don't get the impression that the author has really looked at his CV and made an effort to argue compellingly that he brings a lot to the table. So blaming his entrepreneurial past for his failure to find a job is, in my opinion, misguided.

Finally, the author can't expect a good outcome if he's not where the jobs he's interested in are. If, say, I was interested in meeting the author for lunch next week to discuss a job opening, I would be unable to do so because he's in Thailand. And I, like most other employers, am not going to wait until "mid-September" for the privilege of interviewing him.
That's ignoring the actual "accuracy" of most employee "ranking" algorithms.
And continual, though diminishing improvements is only true if your method of ranking employees is significantly more accurate on existing employees than for job candidates.
Interesting that you mention that, I was thinking along similar lines as both yours and the parent comment.

A true knowledge economy is what I would expect as the result of a "nano-factory" revolution. How much you know and what you know could be as valuable in direct terms as how much you earn is today in dollars.

I am sure I have heard this discussed in more detail before. Probably on HN.

Obviously we are several generations removed from such an event as the cultural shift would be profound. I don't think any of us would like it, me included. I always feel dumb so imagine I'd be part of the lower class in this world.
I find it it interesting that you seem to think it is adequate for you to judge these things 'regardless of German law'. This is a democratically legitimized law that is backed by the vast majority of citizens and has been found to be conforming to the constitution by the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the remarkably potically independent Supreme Court. Just as the US doesn't welcome foreign commentary on laws like 'stand your ground' or 'National Security Letters', other democratic souvereign countries have the right to give themselves laws that conform with the opinions or the majority of its citizens.

Here is the rationale:
Germany provides high quality free public education to everyone. That education is obligatory for children under 15 and it is neglect of parents to deny their children their right to profit from this education. I think this is a good thing and so does the vast majority of German citizens. You don't have to agree.
The Home School Legal Defense Association helped kill American ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Killing US ratification of this treaty, which would have helped extend rights that the US pioneered to people overseas, was absolutely abhorrent. The UN treaty was essentially based on existing American law, was ratified by 130+ nations and had no potential impact on American education. You may remember that Bob Dole was wheeled onto the Senate floor to urge ratification. Homeschool advocates opposition was based on disinformation ("the UN is going to take your kids") I would take anything they have to say with a grain of salt.
He's being sarcastic; suggesting an Orwellian view.
Something like Loon?

http://www.google.com/loon/

Though arguably something like that isn't safe in a war zone? I have no expertise in this section, but it is an interesting dilemma to figure out how to restore basic connection to a area in turmoil.
As a database, the #1 rule is don't lose data. So a model that allows you to defer conflict merges, and to do the merge on any peer, keeps the database doing what it does best, and gives maximum flexibility to the application.

For instance on a customer record you might have three sales folks all qualify a lead as a 4, one adds a fax number, one adds an email address, and one adds the same fax but a different email, and a note about the best time to call. If the database forced the application to merge on encountering each update, there'd never be a chance to set all three versions side by side and make an informed comparison. Instead it would be luck that A and B merge, and then the result merges with C. Or some other order.

Where it gets really useful is if you have different actors that have ownership of the merge on different fields. So for instance you could partially resolve the conflict by merging some fields automatically but present a human with the full set of options for a bigger octopus merge on, say, the notes field.
For those in the SIL Open Font License (there are a number on Google Webfonts), this is explicitly allowed:

---

"Can I use the fonts in any publication, even embedded in the file

Yes. You may use them like most other fonts, but unlike some fonts you may include an embedded subset of the fonts in your document. Such use does not require you to include this license or other files (listed in OFL condition 2), nor does it require any type of acknowledgement within the publication."

from http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL-FAQ1...
Meanwhile, here in Florida (USA), we have a state sponsored virtual school system that doesn't require a single step inside of a school building. Maybe that's one thing we get right here.
Then you should definitely check out his book "Eat and Run". http://www.amazon.com/Eat-Run-Unlikely-Ultramarathon-Greatne...
My point is that both due process and same-sex marriage questions are functional questions.

What function does marriage have in a given place and time? How does a decision to allow or not allow same-sex marriage play into that? Usually the "it's a human right" crowd skips over that first question, which is my reason for discussing it. But not believing that it is a globally applicable human right does not necessarily determine the issue in a specific culture such as our own.

The same exists for due process rights. The due process right exists to ensure that government can't arbitrarily screw with your life because they don't like you. They can't throw you in jail, take your stuff, or the like. The question is how much putting you on a no fly list affects rights which are functionally necessary in our society. For this I think you have to look at the most intrusive implications, not the least. My point is that same-sex marriage is a very different situation where the normal retirement plan is to retire with one's children than in a society such as ours (I am an American though I am in Indonesia, so "ours" refers to American) where we expect pensions to be the primary support for the elderly.

In other words, "you can't fly from Bozeman to Sea-Tac" is not a real problem. It might take a day longer, but you can take a bus. "You can't fly from Honolulu to San Francisco" has very different implications. A no-fly list can't be effective if it distinguishes between these, and quite frankly after 9/11 a the latter flight is more problematic than the former. We know that there is a right to travel internationally and between the States. There are States that a no-fly list makes inaccessible to travellers directly, so therefore it violates that basic right which is a necessity regarding our system of federalism. Moreover, because some states are rendered inaccessible to those on no-fly lists, this also violates the basic equality of the states.

So I think there are a lot of issues here, but I tend to want to see more to "it's a right" than "because I think that would be a good idea." I think rights must be functional, because otherwise they are mere articles of faith.
Nobody is disputing the facts here, so there is no grain of salt to take.
I agree that the curve should really be at the discretion of the instructor, not administrators, who is best fit to apply it reasonably. One of my colleagues was actually told the opposite in a class he taught recently: that he was failing or not giving A's to enough students in the classes he was teaching! It definitely goes both ways, but instructors are reasonably fit to decide how to do their curves.
Standing Together for Greater Transparency
Since you said you are willing to admit you are wrong, I took the time to search and find it. Here you go: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5876185

Excerpt from first reply:

"ETA: I've also typically seen that regardless of the amount of pressure applied by the public for one side of an issue, nearly every politician will simply vote the party line anyways. They know where their bread is buttered, and won't go against party leadership. I've watched legislators look over at a senior party member and be signalled which way to vote when their turn comes up. I don't think anything I've done or said to my representatives has had the slightest impact on their opinion or voting record. That's just how the game is played."

Excerpt from second reply:

"IME: email is worthless. canned letters / faxes go in the garbage. A polite phone call may accomplish something. Better yet if you donated or voted for that politician. Even better if you phone banked." [followed by an explanation of what works, i.e. money]

Excerpt from third comment:

"I was an intern for a congressman. My job was to answer and return constituent emails and calls. We took the feedback, searched for the proper prewritten form letter, printed it out and sent it back with a stamp of the congressman's signature. He never got a single bit of the feedback himself."

Fourth comment mentions that anti-SOPA call-ins seemed to have been successful, but they are forgetting the billions of dollars of corporate money that went into protesting SOPA. Again, it was about money.
It is like the US only has one option - shooting. If we had a medical-industrial complex we could be air-dropping medical supplies and instead of the marines we could send in the doctor corps. There is a ton of things we could do to support the revolution without adding to the risk for civillians or having to worry about what anti-american fighters would do with the equipment afterwards.
Note these are comments by and for Microsoft insiders and former employees. Mini-Microsoft really wants the company to win, although I think he's largely given up by now.

"Partner" is a Microsoft position. Consultant, besides the obvious, I don't know. We really don't need to know anything other than that he's above the author.

"bad attitude problem"

Because the author had previously been pointing out these sorts of problems. Note the ending where the partner consultant was "revisiting his whole opinion of Microsoft."

"desperately in need of a drink"

Well, given that they then drank coffee, only so much, but I originally took it as really in need of some alcohol, probably deferred due to the time of day.
So was parent.
Are you using google speech api? Site looks great!
It's German law? Every developed democracy probably has a few that you might find disagreeable or outright immoral. If you're going to get righteously indignant about every single one of them you probably won't have much time to do anything else.
Actually, the 'Becoming a Data Scientist' one is awesome. The caption derisively says 'Disconnected subway map? Sequential, linear relationships?', but that is exactly what it is. I searched for it and read up on it, and the author thought he'd represent learning paths as subway routes. Data science is now a lot of tools, and I got into reading this map. I know probably 20% of the tools there at the moment. Actually, I found and bookmarked that viz, because it's going to be handy. Sure, it's not perfect, but I like it!
That was hyperbole, sarcasm or cynicism depending on how charitable one feels like being. There's no Schnelling point between children are their parents and children are the state's. The trend is definitely towards the state. That's the entire point of things like Child Protection Services, declaring people unfit parents, etc.

But what I said was bitter libertarian snark influenced by reading homeschooling/unschooling stuff and the tiny children's rights movement.
There are plenty of other things to aspire to in universities, but really, why not master the material in your classes? What is so wrong with that? And why not have that material be hard enough that top mastery is unlikely? Are we so detached from competition that this is now an absurd concept?
No. I think my point (badly made) was that there seems to be a clear difference between infrastructure and one's right to parent as they see fit.
The latter happens more than a little at MIT, and I've witnessed a department head tell a professor you've very possibly heard of that he'd never be allowed to teach a particular course again. That was after making him read every student evaluation, were were uniformly negative except for a single special case, which wasn't exactly positive.
I can easily imagine that some fonts may be licensed for distribution through one provider only, and may not be redistributed under any other means.

Typekit terms of use explicitly prohibit using this method (emphasis mine):

---

(a) You may Use the Licensed Content to design and develop Your Published Websites or webpages (and must Use any Kit We require for such purposes) and You may reference or encode a link to selected Licensed Fonts within Your Published Website design so that when others view or interact with Your Published Websites, they will see Your content displayed with the Licensed Fonts as You intended; and

(b) You may only Use Licensed Fonts within Your Published Websites as described in this Section 3.1.2.

from http://www.adobe.com/products/eulas/tou_typekit/
I grew up in a part of California where many Chinese businesspersons entered and started businesses. Many of these businesses would hire a white man to do some sales. This was generally within communities where white people rarely exceeded 30% of the population. In many, whites made up less than 10%. It was mostly a Mexican American and Asian area.

The reason why was obvious. The local business operators, who were mostly older white people, didn't want to buy from a Chinese person.

Asian guys I knew were resentful. Not only was it racist to do that, but the whole situation was racist. It was a racist response to a racist situation, and it made racism seem hopeless.

As far as accents went, we didn't have them, by and large, unless one was an immigrant. The most common accent was a Chicano English accent.
I am Not a Fan(tm) of homeschooling and support bans of it, but forbidding them to leave is going to far.

In Plato's dialog Crito, Socrates lays out his justification for respecting the rule of law. One of his arguments in to Crito is that, while not under arrest, any Athenian remains free to leave Athens with his family and posessions.

Personally, I think Plato was sort of a hack (Plato has Crito offer only token objections) and disagree with Socrates decision to stay... BUT if the rule of law is to be respected, it seems clear to me that the freedom to opt-out must remain intact. If Germany wants to prevent these people from leaving then they should properly detain them. If they find themselves unwilling or unable to do that, then these people should be free to leave the country.
> But now having typed this, I realize that we are all different, and the path we took is the path we had to take to be who we are...

And that is the real wisdom that age provides :)

I could criticize the family guy for working hard, living in suburbia, and forgoing exciting travel/work opportunities to have a quite acceptable but normal life. But, hey, it works for him, and he has many things that I don't (and vice versa).
In the EU, you don't need to have your passport to travel to other countries; a national ID card will do.
It is not about wasting their time.

There is a difference between something which clearly attributes the trademark and disclaims any link and something which does not.

I have gotten unreasonable C&D letters in the past. It's a typical lawyer tactic of asking for the world and then negotiating back to a reasonable solution. I have always responded with something like that. I have never had the lawyers on the other side say that such an approach is unacceptable.

The fact is you can use a trademark refer to a trademarked product. There is no disagreement there.
Pragmatic Emergency Preparedness
I'd like to see some blogger that's popular on HN start titling posts with non-sequiturs just to troll the absurd submission policy.
Single page version: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/196009/the_scumm_diary...
Renesys' usually tracks and reports on events like this on their blog and, indeed, they posted an article yesterday about this:

http://www.renesys.com/2013/08/whats-next-for-syrias-interne...

A few examples from previous events of a similar nature:

http://www.renesys.com/2011/01/egypt-leaves-the-internet/

http://www.renesys.com/2011/06/syrian-internet-shutdown/

http://www.renesys.com/2012/11/syria-off-the-air/
Yes I don't completely buy their argument. This appeals to Americans quite a bit because there is significant homeschooling compared to other "Western Countries" (Just a hunch, I couldn't find much unbiased data on this).

It seems _sometimes_ the reason, with one case in my own circle of friends, is the bad quality of local public schools.

However I think large number of cases are related to religious education.

I believe that is the intended goal of the German law. To not let parent teach children about God's miracles and water can be turned into wine if you pray hard enough, or how dinosaurs went clubbing with Adam and Eve and stuff like that.

We are battling crazies in Southern states who are pushing this crap even into the public schools. So I believe in this country these German families will find many sympathetic years.

Now, the question I don't know is, how bad is the quality of schools in Germany. Are gangs, bullying, racism pervasive? I can see an argument made in that case, otherwise, sorry, I'll side with the majority of Germans (presumably as a democracy they could have overturned this law many years ago).
What nice theory? Passports are state property. I can't read the article, in China. But you can travel without a passport within the Schengen area. If they can get unsupervised access to their kids they should fuck off with them elsewhere in the EU. There will be neither public nor legal support for homeschooling in Germany and I doubt they'd win if they got to the European Court of Human Rights either. If they stay in Germany they lose their kids or their religion. Flight is their best option.