skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ah, so the only time to discuss a law is when it's a bill before it is passed into a law. That's interesting because I'm quite certain that is in no way how it works. Changes in laws are negotiated all the time. Sometimes willingly by Congress, sometimes forced to by the Supreme Court, and sometimes because the law itself was written to cause the occasional discussion about its own future. Sometimes a law is so badly written it just needs someone to stand up and say it is a bad law. There will be people will attack/defend the law to the last day simply because they have a vested interest in doing so. That's politics.

But having the childish attitude of "its the law of the land" only works for one side as long as we're talking about a law they support. As soon as the opposition pulls the same stunt then all of a sudden that's not a proper defense of discussing problems with a law.

Now, to be clear, I did not support the stunt performed in the Senate. I understood the intention behind it but it was a lost cause before it even started. For one, no matter what happened the Republicans would get the blame for the shutdown because that's always the outcome. The other reason being that the ACA was going forward despite what they would do. Notice how when the shutdown happened federal websites went down almost across the board? Notice how the ACA website was still up and running? Or it attempted to at least. Notice how they were arguing over funding the thing but it moved forward regardless? Interesting how they had to shut down parks that cost them next to nothing to run but could keep working on the ACA website that cost much more. That stunt in the Senate was a waste of time simply because it was going to go forward despite anything the Republicans did. The administration has already ignored rules, regulations, and laws in attempts to get it going, did anyone think that stupid stunt would somehow magically stop it?

As for the President's "I won't negotiate" while accusing the other side of not negotiating, which you seem to support this silly notion, was a mistake. Because one day the Republicans may gain control of the three branches of the government and make a "law of the land" that completely removes the ACA from the books. Will they be able to do so and the Democrats just sit idly by to do nothing? After all, when the Democrats have majority they behave as if the minority should sit down and shut up. "We won", "we have the majority". Those things work both ways. When the Democrats are the minority again, will they advise their members to do what they demanded of the previous minority? I don't expect them to and, in a way, hope that they don't. Regardless, we all know they will take that hypocritical stance. That is 110% politics.
> Instead of assuming that your site does better with extremely long lines of tiny type, even thought that goes against pretty much every typographer's recommendation

It's not really an assumption though, I've already looked at long lines with the `max-width` variable, and the very wide/long versions performed pretty well; see http://www.gwern.net/AB%20testing#max-width & http://www.gwern.net/AB%20testing#max-width-redux
I expect Go to take a large bite out of Ruby and Python and a nibble of of Java.
Notes and Translations for the New York Times coverage of healthcare.gov
Interviews are a horrible test of how someone will perform on the job. Never in work life are you required to come up with a solution immediately. Those types of solutions are almost always wrong. It's only after deep thought and 100s of hours toiling on a problem from every angle that an elegant solution that simplifies presents itself. But sadly, the only way to know if someone is capable of that is to actually hire them for a trial week or 30 days and see how they do and immediately fire or sign for a longer term contract.
up locally, no lag, likes works... weird
DEP, UAC, Security related updates not installed, using built in administrator (technically enabling rather than disabling), or even having your anti-virus disabled.

All those help prevent a situation where the boot up sequence is somehow compromised. Whereas secure boot is only reactive - it won't do anything to prevent the malicious software from installing itself in the first place.

Also, no, I have not gone out and done a survey to find out how many people understand secure boot. However, if you just use common sense and apply your experiences with interacting with an average user (might be your parents, co-workers, relatives, friends, etc.) then how likely do you think the majority of average users will have even heard of secure boot? I'd be willing to bet money on the answer to that.
Teacher Education - An industry of mediocrity
I'm starting to see a pattern here about "presentational CSS class names": considering the superficial presentation layer and not the underlying meaning that links consistent design elements. There's a language to design, and it's a hell of a lot more than "this button should be green".

"They said, "I don't know why this button is blue, but it's supposed to be green". Well it turns out it's blue because it has the class blue on it. Instead of trying to figure out what selector was causing this button to be blue, all I had to do was remove the blue class and add the green class. It took 15 seconds."

There's a whole series of unasked questions going on there:

* Why is the button blue - what led to that conclusion?

* Why is green the right colour?

* What about the other buttons, are they all the right colour? If so, why. If not, why?

* Why does the style guide for the site not specify this properly? (You have a style guide, right? Your CTO and designer did present you with an up-to-date, style guide, right?)

Asking these questions leads you to the semantic understanding of why buttons are supposed to exhibit specific characteristics. It's the WHY that's important, not the WHAT.

CSS excels when there's a requirement for consistency in design, and there's a style guide. When your requirements are a superficial "this button must be green" and you don't stop to ask why, then you've already sacrificed the semantic aspects of the documents you are supposed to be vocal about.

Also, how difficult is it to find what stylerule is causing the button to be blue. Right click on the button, click "Inspect this element in Firebug", in the CSS Inspector find the CSS rule that specifies the colour as blue. Look at the CSS selector itself - does it describe the semantic reason why the presentation is coloured blue? With that understanding of the semantic basis of the button being blue, you have an answer WHY the button is blue.

So now you need to understand why the button is supposed to be green. Get that explained to you, and now you have a good idea of the semantics you need to express, or reuse, a CSS rule that will cause the button to be rendered in Green.

This is where semantic class names win hands down, it tells you the WHY of styles. Without the WHY you don't have a basis for explaining why the button is blue, and no clear inkling of why now it should be green. And absolutely no idea which other buttons on the site are the wrong colour.

And that's about as far away as you can be from a consistent style guide, and presentational accuracy. If everything is ad-hoc, then nothing is consistent.
Why did he only highlight Surface Pro?

Windows RT on the Surface 2 appears to have better battery life than the Samsung Galaxy Tab (according to his chart).
Silent Circle "isn't a US company", but has their US HQ in Washington DC.

They have software engineers in "Silicon Valley".

What makes you think they're "outside the US' legal jurisdiction"?
Meanwhile, the best package building and hosting site that no one has ever heard of: http://openbuildservice.org/ https://build.opensuse.org/

supports all major distros: openSUSE, Fedora, Debian-based, even Arch.
There is also a follow-up post:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/04/the-e...
Then it should be readily available from the Control Panel and not through GPO.

MS hides things in GPO or registry settings when it wants to alleviate the concerns of network administrators while still managing to infuriate the end users who have no business touching 'their' operating system.
But thinking has the side effect of storing lots of stuff in your memory. So you can end up with encyclopedic knowledge of subjects that you've spent a lot of time thinking about. It just isn't knowledge that got stored by explicitly trying to "memorize" things (which means it's more reliable anyway, since it's knowledge that's connected to other things you know).
I counted Germany out the moment the boundless informant information revealed the number of NSA intercepts in Germany was on the order of the number in China (despite the massive population difference and presumable difference in the number of linguists NSA employees for each country).
One of the few plausible explanations for this is that the NSA was doing this surveillance minimally with the cooperation of the German government and likely at the behest of the BND/German government.
Nintendo says Super Mario in-browser game 'illegal'
>Couldn't they just hire someone and say "Fix this. Identify the problem and we will support your findings to get the fix implemented.

Power conservation is more of a mantra, rather than a feature. If you decide that this is your priority, it should infuse every feature and every aspect of the OS. This can absolutely be done, and Microsoft is more than capable to cater to this need. I'd like to know why they haven't done so already. I mean, Intel finally got it with Haswell.
another typo:
"that provides you with an easy to way host and manage"
->
"that provides you with an easy way to host and manage"
To what degree does "worse battery life" mean "worse performance?" I suppose two possible wastes of energy are 1) powering components that should be sleeping 2) inefficient code.

Any of #2 would impact both.
Women get to choose, most importantly perhaps they get to choose to stay home when a baby arrives.

They also get to choose jobs that earn less money, in exchange for more pleasantness and flexible work hours, because they have to worry less about being breadwinners for the whole family.
No one uses Darwin for servers, not even Apple.
Never thought my very first status update would be "test". Damn it!
Depends on what you mean by Open Data.

There are lots of companies that aggregate ranking/keyword data from Google, package it and sell it as a product to SEO companies. Examples include WordTracker, SEMRush, Moz, etc. It's data you and I can get through Google ourselves, but it's almost impossible to get in aggregate.

It depends on how you package the data. You need to present it in a way that can be actionable and help someone towards a business problem.
This is probably just a turn of phrase but

> decent profits to cover costs

Do you mean it was meeting costs and growing in a way which would have led to profit in the absence of a legal tangle with the FBI or whatever?
I had a list of about 300 people when I launched preorders and about 30% of them converted to paying customers. I was sending out weekly updates with progress toward preorders, and then after preorders started I sent out weekly updates with download links for people who paid and "buy now for X% off, won't last long" messages for people who hadn't.

The whole story is here: https://www.petekeen.net/adventures-in-self-publishing
Right, so what's the problem if it looks fine?

The only problem is that you used an ID.

>"do not reuse"

Why not? If someone wants to reuse something, they probably have a good reason. Why would you get in their way? You won't gain anything from doing that.
New Phishing attack targets Italian Postal and Financial service
Real Madrid vs Juventus 23-10-2013 Champions League
Debugging Firefox Failures on Travis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neut...

It's a perfectly cromulent use of "his".
that second one -- where the social network was just a series of client applications rather than a central database -- would be an amazing idea for a product. Like a bittorrent-esque Facebook.
The R&D issue is indeed real. Even if the state already infuses the industry with $31 billions of tax payers money each year into research, patents add an other form of extra cost onto the product (a form of taxation) that also goes to the producers medicine, which a fraction gets into R&D.

What I hear from people, is the question if this form of state supported industry is really the best way to produce superior speed in research. There are no research to support the claim that state support monopolies is the only choice, a choice with by itself is not even enough so the government has to funnel even more cash to keep things going.

The current system also makes the government assessor to murder, by preventing people in producing medicine that saves lives. Its a sacrifice some for the greater good argument, but for a 2013 society it kind of bad. We really can't figure out a better way except forbidding people to heal themselves? Kind of odd system if one think of it.
> What are you saying? That Microsoft can't build a consumer OS with great power-management because the kernel also needs to work on high throughput servers?

It's more the drivers than the kernel. Apple has a lot more control over OS X drivers.
FC Barcelona vs AC Milan 22-10-2013 Champions League
I am willing to bet that there are no special hardships for women who want to enter IT. Quite the opposite really.
> I would need a great incentive to switch how I take notes. I'm thinking a bunch of other developers thought the same thing.

Just like the OP, you've generalized your personal experience to other developers. It is an easy trap to fall into. I agree with the takeaway called out in another comment: validate the idea as objectively as possible and as early as possible.
Yes. Brilliance is overrated.

Most of the day-to-day challenges we face require solutions that are well-thought-out, well-designed, and well-implemented. Brilliant algorithms are not a feature in and of themselves; they are only useful if they solve the actual problem at hand. And even when they do, they often need dependable, well-written, "run of the mill" code to support them and flesh them out.

I would rather work with a team of people who are diligent, dependable, and thorough than one or two brilliant aces. And I would rather my software be written by the former as well.
The Facebook login feature isn't working with the API. Getting massive headache emails now. Luckily we have lots of alternative login methods.

I hope people will see the importance of not putting all of your eggs in one authentication basket.
I'm happy you're able to use it :)
Top Websites Secretly Track Your Device Fingerprint
At the core of OSX is a ton of legacy Unix monolith written in the 70s that I suspect very few in Apple dare ever touch.

I don't think this is true at all. Sure, there's always been a BSD-style environment for compatibility, but Apple has never been shy about ripping and replacing legacy Unix-y infrastructure (see: launchd) or about adding new, "deep" APIs close to the plumbing (see: libdispatch).
I am stopping to talk with people who ask for such a bs.

Check out the last technical interview task that I got
```
Objective:
Write a program that prints out a multiplication table of the first 10 prime numbers.
The program must run from the command line and print to screen one table.

Notes:
- DO NOT use a library method for Prime (write your own)
- Use Tests. TDD/BDD
- IMPRESS US.
```

I mean I can impress you but how will this correlate with production code?
Perhaps the Windows Timer Resolution

> http://randomascii.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/windows-timer-re...

could explain this problem?
You get instaupvotes on HN for hating on Google so there is that.
Do US citizens have to install pen registers on their own service(s)?
Simple: pay more for nursing and child care.
>I highly doubt that.

Have you read the actual application and the references?
Apple Does Something Amazing
They do. If you can read French, check out http://reflets.info/.
The article's from April.
In my experience, most every place that declines you based on report data will send you a letter saying (in very general terms, but still) what criterion you failed, as well as the information about where to get your report.
There are multiple concepts of jurisdiction.

It does very little good to just "incorporate offshore" and still have US operations, US principals, etc.

If you're a US citizen doing something questionable in the US, you have basically three choices: try to do it in a compliant way, renounce your citizenship, or leave the US and/or operate underground and hope you never get caught.

While I have problems with the US Government's actions in the terrorism/cyberspace regulation/IP spheres (particularly in that the legislative branch has totally abdicated its role in oversight, as well as being generally incapable and obstructionist in general), I'm a loyal US citizen, respect the laws of the US and its political process, etc. So, all I'm willing to do is try to do things in a superior technical way, or to try to get the laws changed in the US.

The silent circle guys are basically all US citizens, and as far as I'm aware, equally wedded to the idea of US legal compliance.
I have a standing offer to anybody to pay them 100% of the profits off of anything they create for 12 months for my product.

I've offered higher amounts as well (200% of profits, 120% of sales) in order to incentivize people to try.

In my experience it's really hard to find qualified sales people and the time investment in finding good people is expensive so by being too cheap, you end up spinning wheels, making no money, AND wasting your time.
> No matter what definition you have heard of, the claim that the capital gains tax should be zero is basic economic theory that is taught to undergrads No matter what definition you have heard of, the claim that the capital gains tax should be zero is basic economic theory that is taught to undergrads (I know cause I taught it as a TA)

Teaching anything that has "should" in it (other than the norms of the scientific method itself) in a science class, which economics purports to be, is wrong, plain and simple. Economics profs that are abusing their position to teach their personal policy preferences and conflating them with the science of economics are the kind of thing that gives economics, and the other social sciences, a bad name.

But, in any case, it is not any kind of economic theory (basic or otherwise), its a policy preference. Real economic theories deal with the behavior of economic systems, not preferences for how government should interact with them.

Obviously, real economic theories combined with value assumptions can inform policy preferences.

> I added my own comments on why we do tax capital gains

Which are also wrong, and seem to be an attempt to rationalize the crackpot "theory" from the class you TA'd with your misunderstanding of how capital gains are taxed (which seems to mistake the way long-term capital gains are taxed for how all capital gains are taxed.)

The real reason capital gains are taxed the way they are is because they viewed as income, so short-term capital gains (earned over a period of one year or less holding the asset) are taxed as normal income, and long-term capital gains are taxed at a lower rate based on the observation that, in a system with progressive taxation on annual income, taxing income earned over a period longer than a year as normal income in the year the gains are realized would result in that income being overtaxed.

There's also certainly a school of thought that capital gains should be taxed preferentially so as to encourage activities that produce capital income, from those who think that favoring those activities has desirable effects. This seems to be far more common (among people in general, and economists in particular, than the crackpot "capital gains aren't income" idea you taught), but, still, it isn't an economic theory, its a political preference (and many notable economists disagree with it.)
Not if they are girls, I suppose.
> At the core of OSX is a ton of legacy Unix monolith written in the 70s that I suspect very few in Apple dare ever touch.

The Darwin kernel is regularly updated; for example Apple replaced Unix init and cron with launchd in 2005, achieved full POSIX compliance in 2007, and went to full 64-bit in 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28operating_system%29
> I would have preferred you used the 90% of your words to give better examples of how to do things better than overstating how OOCSS and BEM are wrong

This is definitely something I'd like to do as well, but I wanted to focus on the areas I found problematic first and foremost. I may post a follow-up based on the feedback I've received.

> Why not have the presentation be the specification, and we can just build the html to conform to the that specification instead

As I said, I don't believe this is an appropriate approach for a medium which has no absolute, definitive interpretation. A website isn't how it looks, because how it looks will differ depending on how you access it. The only absolute truth when talking about websites is the semantic purpose of the markup underlying it, because purpose is universal: a navigation element is a navigation element regardless of whether it's being displayed on a TV, a desktop browser, a smartphone, or being read out by a screen reader.

> I imagine that's just because you'd rather see better looking html than you would see better looking css.

I'm actually interested in both :)

> You have the semantic issues well thought out, however you are flat out declaring data semantics are more important than presentation semantics.

What are ‘presentation semantics’? I think this is a corruption of the concept of semantics. Semantics are what a thing is, or means, or does; not how it is presented

> My CTO and designer (2 people I have a lot of respect for) were the people who eventually changed my mind on this. They said, "I don't know why this button is blue, but it's supposed to be green". Well it turns out it's blue because it has the class blue on it. Instead of trying to figure out what selector was causing this button to be blue, all I had to do was remove the blue class and add the green class. It took 15 seconds.

Changing how you structure the CSS in your application based on the whims of people whose area of expertise isn't CSS sounds like a nightmare scenario to me. If you're bootstrapping with a small team I can understand wanting to have everyone being able to contribute, but you should also be able to recognise what the limitations of their skills are. In the example you give, I would be using my web developer tools / inspector etc. to find out the origin of the erroneous property. If you're using a preprocessor there are source maps that can help with identifying how a rule was built. I certainly wouldn't conclude it's easier to use a presentational class name just so that my CTO could understand the code.
After dating a nurse and finding out about a bed that was just a bit too close to the thing getting sucked in.

Yeah, MRI's aren't exactly risk free "adventures".
This is a flamebait, of course. No need to think how to respond any longer, just move along.
For me, the most important part of this video is when they are reciting the pledge, and say "one nation, indivisible".
Very Easy Changelogs with Git
Wow! Nice conversion rate! Good job on not making the same mistake again!! And Good luck!

I'm reading the "Adventures" post as we speak.
> With probably no place in Germany that's more than 250km away from an US/UK military base, and the "extraordinary rendition" program in mind

To which several European governments, mostly the UK, but also Italy, happily cooperated. The other ones have been lucky enough not to be caught red-handed but I have little doubt that they knew perfectly what was going on (at best) or were actively providing support.