skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Wow that sounds like some kind of german from the distant past, if at any time we spoke that way. Don't get me wrong! It just sounds, let's say interesting :-)

Hahaha. Vor 3-4 Jahren könnte ich etwas besseres produzieren, aber jetzt nicht. Es gab wirklich eine Zeit, wann ich Aufsätze über der Schriften des Heinrich Bölls schriebe. Heute könnte ich nicht nur etwas zum Mittagssen bestellen. Und das schmerzt mich.

>Thinking about it, it's probably the imperative form leading into the sentence. If we reword it a little, it gets a lot better: Eine Frage an die Deutschen: warum haben die Piraten so wenig Erfolg? In Bezug auf die NSA Affäre, usw., meine ich.

Danke sehr :D
Educated Guesses Re: A7 Transistor Density and Foundry
Remind me, with science: When were we humans last wiped out, again?
This is huge. I can't wait to use this. Now we just need the same thing from the CDC, FDA, DOJ, DOE, etc.
Sometimes these rules emerge out of a "political" process (who would have guessed). A particularly smart individual might be able to draw up some extremely smart and simple scheme. The problem is choosing the smart individual.
You can form your own opinions about global warming, rising ocean levels, the acidification of the seas, the destruction of our rain forests or the unsustainable nature of our carbon based economy (see peak oil). I don't have time to reference the multitude of articles on the subject, but they're abundantly available... there's this great site called Google.com which can help you with that.

Regarding the issue of 'natural beauty' in the world, I see it on a micro-level when I go to a lake in the summer that was once pristine but is now overrun with seaweed due to Nitrogen runoff from farmer fields. I see it on a macro level when I read about things my children's generation might never enjoy, like the beauty of a coral reef.

At the end of the day with so much 'pseudo science' thrown around from fringe scientists, all anyone has is an 'opinion'. You now have mine.
We've already demonstrated that we can bend physical laws to our needs, or have you missed that point in your rush to cast away any faith in the human species' ability to manage its resources? Because: managing our resources is what makes the difference, entirely, between extinction and survival, and we've been doing precisely that for 200,000 years so far.
Experiment. Pick a random VC firm, look at the bios, and count Ivy/Stanford UG/MBA.

E.g. Accel Partners, just the SV office: http://www.accel.com/#people.

I count 15 of 23 that have either an undergraduate degree or an MBA from an Ivy-league school or Stanford. Mostly HBS/GSB. That's 65% representation, relative to the less than 1% of undergraduates who graduate from the Ivy league.

Now, you can theorize that maybe it's because people who get into these schools are smart to begin with, and would have been equally successful elsewhere. But there is a lot of overlap in predictors between these schools and the ones right behind them. E.g. SAT Math interquartile ranges for Duke are 690/780 and the ones for Princeton are 710/800, and within that narrow range also fall Northwestern, Stanford, U Chicago, Penn, Columbia, Harvard, and Yale. The student bodies at these schools overlap more than they differ. If the key differentiator was the quality of the people coming in and not pedigree by itself, you would see a more graduated drop-off in representation.

I think it's obvious that the pipelines that Harvard/Yale/Princeton/Wharton/Stanford have to elite organizations in finance are a huge boost for people who have the option to acquire that credential, distinct from the qualifications those people come in with.
Many humans "thrive" in conditions that are illegal to put humans in to.

I don't really see your point, since it doesn't even remotely talk about the relative rates of the two populations or compare what would happen with humans to what would happen without for any of the species.

It seems to be contentless objection to what I said, despite the fact that humans are known to greatly increase the prevalence of all of those species, many of which seem to be getting by just fine for many of their members.
As an outsider, is there much difference in people from around the country culture-wise? Or, I guess phrasing it a little better, is there "Germany" or do some regions define identity?
Dude(I hope you are,or else Ma'am), HongKong is an urban conglomerate(yes it is independent region). It is a city you can't apply the same logic of cities to a an entire nation.My point is still valid.
I recently moved to NYC to join a startup and I must say the community is thriving here. You can find a lot of like-minded people at local Meetups.

This was on the front page a couple of days ago - should give you a good idea of ecosystem here: http://www.cbinsights.com/new-york-venture-capital
What a ridiculous article. Not because it doesn't make some reasonable points, but because it assumes these points are so unique and unknown. Doesn't everyone hear the classic Malthus-versus-technological-advancement argument in highschool? I certainly did multiple times.

I mean, it's more-or-less the basis for all Sci-Fi: stories fall under either A) rich-get-richer and pending disaster as the Earth is overburdened, B) technology makes everything wonderful, C) Humans explicity inhibit their population, or D) humans find new land on other planets (usually also coupled with A,B, or C or Earth)). This isn't some debate that hasn't happened. This isn't some revelation that one comes to as an ecologist, this is an often-rehashed discussion. A worthy discussion, certainly, with points on both sides. But not one which the author has just now discovered a barely-known side of.

Now if the author had done some serious research and presented actual evidence for his side, I'd be all ears. Too bad there wasn't anything new in the article.
Well made, but you really have got to fix the slow scrolling. I would have to have my midfinger amputated if I were to scroll all the way to the end.

Slick presentation though.
Docker is a way of making config management easy. Here there really is less stuff. You build a binary with your whole application and all its dependencies that actually self hosts. And is smaller than Docker's init process.

And a VM is better isolated than a Linux container.

EDIT: the restrictions are not necessarily permanent either. Its only a first early release...
We're talking about visuals here, so how isn't it?
So you honestly believe that if someone kidnapped the Duke of Cambridge's newborn son, it wouldn't be international news, because "it happens too often"?

I routinely get stories about single families in China who have had their kids kidnapped for organ theft, even if it's not all of them. I find it HIGHLY unlikely that an international celebrities child would be kidnapped without it being major news.

You're going to have to do better than bald assertion for me to be convinced of that.
Hsrd drives do not weight as much, unless you are talking about 3.5" drives, not laptop drives.
When I was living there, it was encouraging interacting with people at various hubs of activity around town such as the Cambridge Innovation Center and Dogpatch Labs.
Given that I keep hearing security professionals say they weren't paranoid enough, I suspect the truth is everyone else now is more paranoid than you were six months ago, which must be really disconcerting.
Redhat puts a lot of effort into building its enterprise distro. Yeah, it's mostly out of FOSS parts, I get that, but distros are nontrivial and costly undertakings.

I've always had a bit of a problem with Centos, which as I understand takes Redhat's work, removes the proprietary parts, and redistributes for free-as-in-beer - perhaps depriving Redhat of a sale or two. It's not exactly theft, but not sporting either.

Would somebody straighten me out? Am I wrong to avoid Centos based on social principle? What does Redhat think of Centos?
Firstly, we're not talking about 1 small "Amazon", we're talking about a large number. Secondly, for such businesses to succeed, you do need a shift in culture. If consumers care about convenience above everything else, then larger businesses will always tend to dominate. However, if consumers hold other values in higher regard, then smaller businesses have a chance. The values that these customers hold will determine which approaches are successful. For example, companies that offer specialist knowledge, customisable products, a higher level of personal service, etc... could compete.

Speaking personally, Amazon is my go to source when I don't know much about what I'm buying, and just want something half decent. The reviews and the speed of checkout are Amazon's strengths for me. They're not necessarily the best on price, and if I research further I tend to find better products elsewhere too.

Whether we have this culture shift away from large retailers is up to us. We get what we deserve.
> You just don't agree with the article's claim that the problem can be solved ...

That's correct. The article relies on a common logical error, to wit: catastrophe hasn't overtaken us yet, and that stands as evidence that it cannot ever happen, i.e. the past predicts the future.

It's one thing to accept that we can't solve population problems by pointing fingers at other people. But it's quite another to try to claim the problem doesn't exist at all.

> basically you don't think humans will be able to come to grips with the social changes that would be required to manage ourselves as a species responsibly.

It's a bit more complicated than that. In a mixed population of people who can grasp the nature of biological limits, and others who cannot, those who cannot eventually become the entire future population -- people congenitally indisposed to act intelligently. It's the inevitable outcome of natural selection.

That's an easy problem to state, but impossible to do anything about without abandoning all civilized standards of behavior. If we do nothing, mass death becomes the problem. If we try to "solve" the problem, fascist and eugenic political measures become the problem. That's not any kind of choice.

My point? This isn't a movie in which everything gets resolved in the third act. All our choices are bad ones, but the worst is to imagine the problem doesn't exist, as the author of the linked article tries to do.
This is really just an example of why there are SO MANY contact management apps. It's not a one-size-fits-all industry by any means.

1) The data.

This is usually just a spreadsheet, simple table, or CSV of names and emails, phone numbers, addresses, etc.

2) Storage and maintenance.

Where is this information stored so it can be retrieved and modified easily from ALL the crazy devices and software we have that needs access to it?

3) How we access and use this information.

Whether it's in an email client where you start typing the first letters of a name and the information shows up, or you get a call on your phone and it associates the number with a name in your database, etc. And how do you add someone new?

I think 1 & 2 are solvable with a standardized format and the Cloud.

It's #3 that will constantly, always, forever, be different for everyone. I don't need to do what the author needs to do in this post. I usually just need all my contacts in my phone. I've tried to help associates manage contacts, and they usually hate what I show them too (and many times they hate several options that I show them). Everyone is different.

Maybe the author should develop his idea. It's possible that his solution could scratch the itch of a couple thousand. Who knows.
Well, I've got more than 10 years of management and team lead experience.

You don't need an exit interview. I usually know when people are unhappy before they even quit. While I do not try to be friends with people who have worked for me, they've known me to be straightforward and honest and to not be a puppet of the higher ups. Most of them have had no issue letting me know their grievances as they occur during normal working life, and they have a good idea of what changes are within my scope of control and those that are not.

Also, the best time to ask those questions is when you're being handed the resignation letter. If your track record with the employee is good, i.e., they know you don't get bitter about them leaving, you'll probably get pretty honest and truthful responses. A formal exit interview in my mind is a waste of time.
Actually, Scheme is more accessible than ever before. If installing MIT Scheme and Edwin/Emacs is too difficult, now there's Racket-SICP, which allows you to program with DrRacket, a beginner-friendly graphical IDE, and actually comes with implementations of some parts of SICP that MIT Scheme omitted, like the picture language and (afaik) some concurrency primitives.

Is Scheme really decreasing in usage? Sure, in recent years there have been high-profile moves to Python at MIT and UCB, but I don't know of any hard stats on worldwide Scheme usage. Not that it matters.
If you disagree with a penalty issued by the police, you can appeal to the judicial branch.

This is a fine principle provided that someone innocent who defends themselves successfully in court will then be compensated so they don't lose out in any way. The reality appears to be that for things like minor traffic offences, you can wind up spending more time and far more money travelling to have your day in court than you would have lost if you just paid up under protest, and you might also be risking a higher penalty if the court does find you guilty of exactly what you were previously charged with.

With motoring offences there is also the points system to consider, so it might be worth going to court for that reason. However, generally someone prosecuted but found not guilty in the UK doesn't seem to get any sort of compensation for even actual financial losses they incur defending themselves, never mind the value of their lost time or anything to make up for the obvious distress for an extended period that going to court in these cases is likely to cause.

It's rather like the small claims track. In principle, it's a worthy public service. In practice, for a professional with a full time job and family commitments who is working without expert advice because the point is to avoid involving expensive lawyers in low-value cases, the time just to figure out how to file against someone without jeopardizing your case before it's even started is prohibitive.
NASA Launches New Machine Learning Challenge
An Algorithm That Makes a Computer Paint Like a Human
I am pretty sure you are living in a first world. No I am not a political nutjob. I was born in and live in a 3rd world country, I have seen all the problems, Just type Indian food security bill in Google. I mean come on,it is not even funny how the situation is in south Asia.
Corruption and the world's biggest building.
Obvious objections - JS has no tail call elimination, no macros, and state-changing is managed with entirely different conventions in Scheme. Also the conceit of SICP (not really justified) is that they don't have to teach you syntax, because homoiconicity. Still, I think it's a worthy pursuit to try to bring the insights of this book to a wider audience.

Side note: the navigation is really irritating. The back button only works sometimes, because it's replacing content without doing some kind of pushState. So you have to hunt for links.

Another side note: Sean Burke and Piers Cawley have ported some of mjd's excellent book Higher-Order Perl to JavaScript. This might be even better, because both Perl and JS have C-like syntax hiding some impressive functional capabilities. I wish someone would finish that, but I guess few people even know about HOP, these days.

http://interglacial.com/hoj/hoj.html

http://www.bofh.org.uk/2010/11/18/higher-order-javascript
"Squeezing out more resources" isn't exactly what's happening.

Agricultural technology is still progressing and we could probably feed any population growth beyond any current prediction of human population.
Storing Two Floats in a Float
This would be cool as a desktop. Yeah, desktops are already modular and upgradable. But if had this Lego-like interface, anyone could do it, and it'd be a ton of fun.

Actually, even better would be a whole computer in a single block. You could then buy an identical computer and connect it to the first one, to make a more powerful single computer. It'd add a little bit more of a boost of CPU power, GPU power, RAM, and HDD. You'd never have to upgrade; instead you just keep buying more blocks and attaching it to your old hardware. Of course it'd be less efficient than a non-Lego computer, but it'd be really fun to use.
Bad branding exercise: Westinghouse logo on a prisoner's electric chair hood
but the clone site does the same thing - presumably at the same penetration
I'm really curious about one aspect of cyber-bullying. With regular bullying in schools you have to face the person bullying you everyday and without the intervention of an adult it's difficult to stop the abuse. With cyber-bullying you can just close your account and the cyber-bullying stops. You may still encounter the problem in the real world but the cyber portion is finished.

I'm not trying to trivialise it and I understand when you're on the receiving end of bullying it might not seem this simple but every time I've seen one of these stories recently it's a question I've asked myself. Is there any data to show why people who have been cyber-bullied don't just shut down their accounts?
> You are right that it doesn't guarantee anything, except to those who carefully apply scientific principles to their management of resources, folks otherwise known as 'farmers'.

Wouldn't science suggest we model based on the systems as they are instead of past performance? Let me hypothesize for a moment here to create a situation where the past performance may fail for predicting the future: (1) Assume that plants have traditionally been nutrient limited. (2) We are no longer nutrient limited. (3) We are now insolation to stored energy limited. We don't have a good way to increase insolation, so we'd better come up with a way to increase the efficiency of photosynthesis. (Not to say that there aren't plenty of ways around this. Maybe we'll use solar cells to power chemical sugar making plants.)

> For at least the last 200 years, the standard of living of hundreds of millions of people has been raised, again and again, over and over.

You quoted me, but I'm having a hard time interpreting your response in the context of you understanding me. I was stating that we might be better off with less population, not simply that the standard of living can increase with an increasing population. To state it again, we could have X% increase with double the population, but with our current population we might have Y%. Is Y > X?
> The rate of both mass killings and individual killings is WAY down from what it's been historically.

You're making a common statistical error, one that climate change deniers use daily -- if you perform a moving average using a long averaging interval, the climate is warming up. If you perform a moving average using a short averaging interval, the climate is cooling off.

The second measurement is an error because it can only predict the future if the future is limited to a year or two in duration. But the long averaging interval is a more honest and reliable predictor of the future. That predictor shows a warming of the climate, and it also shows that eventually, population growth will collide with mass death.
Contraception, counter to intuition, doesn't affect population growth...

There's a nice course on EdX about global poverty.
In what way does it guarantee a more "bountiful planet" other than more extreme weather?
The point is that if you fix it in new browsers, you'll break it in old browsers, and vice-versa. Adding an "opt-in" for the new (correct) way of doing things lets you serve the old client-side rotation logic to the old browsers, and the CSS pragma to the new browsers.
This is a pretty negative portrayal (obviously) of the dark side of social media. I think that it should be taken that people should be careful about getting too sucked in rather than thinking that social media is "evil". A lot of good and amazing things have come from Facebook (maybe chat-roulette not so much). For example, the Soccer Goalie story is pretty moving (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpOvYWd4KW4). Granted this came directly from Facebook, there are other similar stories out there if you look.
To be fair, we'd both agree that we're bending "natural laws" not physical laws. Right? I mean: we're not getting energy for free, we're just capturing more of it.
Ex-Nuggets coach Karl reportedly sued by agent
Exactly,
Swing is a great framwork(It has it's own problems/limitations, every framwork has).
Like this project http://rhombus-tech.net
> Agricultural technology is still progressing and we could probably feed any population growth beyond any current prediction of human population.

We already can't feed our present numbers, or haven't you been paying attention?

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20f...

Quote: "The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that nearly 870 million people of the 7.1 billion people in the world, or one in eight, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2010-2012."

I love hearing from environmental deniers, who say there's no limit to how many people we can feed -- people who ignore the fact that this is already not true.
I feel like this kind of horrific tragedy must be addressed and especially in the context of virtual/computer facilitated environments by developers and engineers.

Here is a problem that I would like to see combated with machine learning and sentiment analysis. Combined with moderation and report functions efforts can be made to identify extreme bullying and address/stop the perpetrators. Indicators of suicidal thoughts in, for example, Google searches could be a channel for parental notification to prevent these kinds of tragedies.

I am not an expert, but leveraging the technology available to help in the fight against extreme bullying seems like a worthy pursuit alongside education of parents and children as well as stricter legislation on harassment and bullying that leads to injury or death.
That and don't give kids unmonitored access to the internet and text-capable cell phones. There's really no reason at all for them to have those things, aside from "everyone else does."
Failed. Well, technically I think they let you return if you demonstrate this and that elsewhere, but the university most certainly dismissed me for academic reasons. So, failed.
This is awesome.. but are we sure this is brand new? I feel like I've seen this before (then again, I do dream about government APIs and data). I do know the page says "Last Modified Date: August 19, 2013"

Does anyone know more?
Half the jobs?! Whew, that's some chunk of work. I need to get busy...
Wondered the same. Her mom closed her facebook acct and took other measures, and the girl went back to other sites. I suppose that if there is a massive concentration of social activity online and you want to be part of it you will endure the bullying rather than be an outcast. Very complicated situation, I'm sure. Can victims become addicted to the attention, even if it is negative?
Some data from the CDC, FDA, and more are available from data.gov and healthdata.gov. Many agencies choose to adopt a open data platform like socrata.com (I know these guys and they rock). Is there anything specific you're looking for from CDC/FDA? Health data is my thing.
I've seen it quoted that if Americans could accept a 1946 standard of living, we could have a 2.6-hour workday - as it is, some of that 5.4 hours goes to extra cars and televisions, and most of it goes to bolster the income of the suffering rich.