skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
NCSAM Roundup and the Big Hacking Events of 2013
> There is very little difference between "investing" in Bitcoin and pulling the lever on a slot machine.

LOL, seriously? With slot machine you are guaranteed to loose statistically. Bitcoin is very different bet. No one can calculate what the probabilities are for different outcomes when it comes to Bitcoin.
Well that Java exploit wouldn't work on me because I have Java uninstalled and disabled on all my computers.

That's not to say I an confident I wouldn't screw up in some other way, but Java should not be on the computers of anybody who cares about security.
> The central premise of geneticism is that these things are wrong

Then I deny the existence of 'geneticism' as you apparently define it, and say it's a strawman argument against the notion that anything is determined or influenced by genetics.
You can use tab + space instead of clicking.
With all the financial institutions using antiquated technologies, all with their own little twists, that won't work with anything else and barely work with the standards they themselves set up... yeah, that basically kills any project that would like to help an individual manage their financial portfolio. Well-specced and adhered to standards can be wonderful. Thousands of entities making it up as they go and not working with each other, not so much.
You mean soft currency? Bitcoin is the hardest currency to exist, you know...

http://stakeventures.com/articles/2012/03/07/the-may-scale-o...
Powershell really is crippled by default, unlike bash. Your equivalent is only equivalent (the sudo part) if you start powershell with 'run as administrator', which you probably shouldn't, but it's quite common practise because Windows doesn't have a good, convenient equivalent to sudo. Luckily you can install one with 'scoop install sudo'.

Note you don't need to run as admin to install scoop--it's all about installing stuff for your user account without requiring elevation.

You are right though that you probably shouldn't just run scripts like this if you don't trust them. I do it all the time because it's convenient and I'm not running elevated. You can always check the source if you're not sure.
modern criminal organizations are pretty limited in scope north of the border

So all those illegal drugs just magically appear from nowhere?

There are still bad places in the US, but there are awfully few no-go zones

How many major cities in the US have you been in? How many of them have no-go zones? How many compared to 1950?
As a South African, I'm fascinated to learn that during the 1980s, PLATO was deploying for tertiary-school education, even in discriminated-against (e.g. black, 'coloured') colleges.

It's bizarre to think that in the dying days of apartheid there was already some faction of the government seduced by the promise of third-world techno-utopianism.
The banking consolidation is far more concerning to me than any of the other groups listed. The article massively overstates the control that companies like Pepsi / Coke / P&G / J&J / Mars et al. have. In the US market, they're actually a small slice of the $10.6 trillion in consumer spending (3% or so perhaps).

It does not however overstate the control the financial giants have. BAC + WFC + C + JPM are sitting on $8 trillion in assets. The too big to fail group has gotten dramatically bigger in the last five years.

The list also curiously misses giants like Cargill, Monsanto, Exxon, Chevron, Berkshire Hathaway, and Koch Industries.

Energy cartels concern me a lot more than who controls the potato chip market, for example.

Also there are far better examples of market dominance by a group of companies. Take car insurance, where six companies control nearly 60% of the entire market.

Or there's always the AT&T / Verizon duopoly. They reign over a pretty massive market.

Four auto companies control nearly 60% of the US auto market.
You make a fair point, but look at housing prices.
This link now redirects to Amazon for some reason.
Just because something is good for business doesn't mean that not doing it will cause a company to go out of business. It surprises me how often this argument is trotted out as a matter of fact as opposed to a theoretical outcome of perfect competition.
In many organisations, the security advice is to force AllSigned via group policy - this script will never run.
Yes, this is a good point. Agreed fully.

There's a hint of at least two tenuous causative implications there: if you're successful, you ought to think twice before wasting time blogging (ie. blogging by the CEO adds no value to the business). Or the corollary: if you're blogging, chances are you're not yet successful (it's a marker for lack of success). Both are reaching.

Blogging by the CEO (founder) simply means that marketing is (also) done by the CEO. The founders and CEOs who don't blog probably delegate marketing activities to specialists (nothing wrong with that). You delegate when you don't possess the skills to execute. This will probably happen when the founders or CEOs don't possess the technical knowledge or expertise about their own fields.
Great point. I wonder, is it more about diversifying risk (employability, keeping up with new tech)? Or the pure pleasure of learning? Both?
Ah, like the good old days. There was a metasearch engine that was fairly popular in pre-Google times. Can't remember the name of it though.
Yes! This is the point that always seems to be missed when we talk about abundance economics. There are some goods that aren't abundant - housing is one of them. If we can't find a solution to long commutes to work / restaurants / theatre / the beach etc then housing Ina good area will remain a scarce good. It will take a bigger and bigger slice of our income, because we are competing with other people, and the abundance of other products, freeing up that money to be spent on housing. If you want to live in the middle of nowhere, you can buy a house very cheaply - they don't cost very much to build these days (thanks abundance!) but if you want to live on the river front, or in the cafe district, well, be prepared to sink a large percentage of your income into your house.

Of course we may end up finding a solution to the constrained housing supply - maybe populations will decrease, or robotic cars will make commutes shorter / less painful, or maybe we will develop virtual living, with people hanging out / working in virtual reality, not real reality.

Housing isn't the only scarce good. Being able to go to a live performance of your favourite band, and indeed the host of things that you can't do today at any price are other examples. But housing is far and away the scarce good that has the largest impact on most of us, and that is only going to continue to grow in importance in the near term.
> what dev tools are in the buckets ? ~ set-executionpolicy unrestricted -s cu ??...
Why do you assume that minority-owned or nondiscriminating businesses would run discriminating businesses out of the market? You're assuming, at the very least, that the competitive benefit of nondiscrimination exceeds the barriers to entry in the market.
Fortunately we have a government of rational actors playing in ideal conditions to legislate for us!
Would definitely be very supportive of a bugfix release.
Again, do you actually believe that the widespread discrimination against pre-civil rights blacks was rational behavior? If not, why did it persist for so long? Where were all of those entrepreneurs fixing the system through competitive advantage?

I think the answer here is that the advantages it confers aren't sufficient to allow an upstart to overcome its disadvantage--namely, market position. Having more rational hiring practices is not a trump card. Lots of poorly run companies beat well-run ones all the time, but it doesn't mean they wouldn't be more successful as better-run companies.

I'll also note that there are a number of confounding factors that make non-discrimination more attractive when enforced corrosively. For example, let's say you're an industry with widespread discrimination against gay people. Gay people leave the industry, and are thus not readily available to those willing to hire them. And perhaps they're typically less experienced because of that discrimination, so that makes it less useful to hire them. A sort of tragedy of the commons in the labor market. It's still irrational to discriminate, just less so, and perhaps the disadvantages of doing so fit under the noise floor. But with legislation, the feedback loop works the other way, and it makes a lot more sense to hire from this now larger and more experienced labor pool. Could increase the overall output a lot more than having one company float to the top through marginally better hiring.
As a conservative who hides his political beliefs in the tech sector, while my coworkers freely swap progressive political articles over the company's email lists, I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Cook.

If the government prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of religion, then why not also political beliefs? There is little difference between the two.
Why so complicated. We are already in a gravity well, it is cheaper to throw stuff down it than throwing it out - aka - throw them into the sun.
People on the left can't seem to make up their minds about corporations. On the one hand corporations are amoral profit machines, completely without qualm or consideration for the human element. On the other, they don't care about profit. It just does't work for me as a logical framework.

The most likely explanation here, IMO, is Apple's policy actually hurts the bottom line a tiny bit, but the PR value outweighs the problems. But note if this is the case the law he's pushing will be a net (small) negative for other companies.
> Forcing others to adhere to our own moral preferences seems fundamentally and deeply flawed.

I bet you're fine forcing others to adhere to your own moral preferences re: burglary, assault, rape, and murder.
Love it - would be really interested in hearing your story (where'd it start? why give up the concept?). Might also want to list it at https://sideracket.com - it's not a marketplace in buy-sell terms, but it's a good place to put it up for adoption :)
You left engineers who think their command of technology makes them superior to all of these "recent" luddite invaders off the list. Your comment reflects the essence of what a large part of the article criticizes, an insular technologist culture that feels most of its ailments come from without. I agree that I've seen some of the folks you mention parading around, but have run into even more technology folks who think their hot new startup is far more important than anything else someone could be working on.
Every business requires public resources to maintain. The police, to guard their warehouses? The trained fire department, to reduce their insurance rates to something manageable? The roads and water and power infrastructure? They didn't build that. The amount of taxes they paid didn't fund even a hundredth of what that cost.

So why should my taxes go to help fund their bigotry?
Germans had many allies during WWII, almost every country conquered by Germans had some "legion" in Werhmaht(name of german army), even in UK there was some nazi/german political party.
No, it doesn't help, because it's probably unreasonable to believe that Apple would recoup enough of those gains to counteract the losses they suffer from losing their competitive advantage.

It's like telling US Sugar that it'd be a net gain for them to lose their tariff protections.
So all your complaints are against the terminal emulator, which everyone agrees is bad. Use something like ConEmu. Here's Scott Hanselman on ConEmu - http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ConEmuTheWindowsTerminalConsol...

> PowerShell overshot the mark, and wound up being unusable

You haven't still any points against Powershell and continue to pile up on it.
The question I have is what are the values that you want these experimental societies to live by. Tech for tech's sake is pointless.

Sounds like Page and Thiel want to be the experimenters and someone else to be the guinea pigs. I doubt those two want to be in those societies other than as dictators. Too much to lose.

We just need a new frontier like the moon or mars.
I wish I could use this with critical mass in my home city of Montreal. I just searched HN for 'roommates' thinking, "there's gotta be a better way to do this! someone must've talked about it." And here we are.

Searching for a new home with other people is indeed tiring. I wish you well!
With alcohol that's even worse, there'sit's similar: Diageo owns Smirnoff. Johnnie Walker, Baileys, Guinness, Moët, Hennessy, Captain Morgan, Gordon's, Zacapa,...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diageo
Bont T-One Track Shoe
The handmade 100% carbon monocoque construction of the Bont t-one track cycling shoe is made for pure performance. With its unidirectional carbon construction (with exception of final cosmetic layer), 3.6 mm stack height, industry leading strength to weight ratio and Bont’s proprietary resin allowing customisation of fit, the t-one will ensure that your power is transferred straight to the drive train without waste.
Do you have a proposed mechanism for why the law would be a net negative for companies?
What stops you from saying that "Arch is a great way to know Arch" then? It's not as if it doesn't have its own package manager and all, like any other distro...
the idea that value comes from a day's work

Where did Adam Smith say this? From what I understand of Smith's position, it was that value comes from either use or trade: you produce something and either use it yourself, or trade it for something else. How long it took you to produce it is irrelevant to what you can use it or trade it for.
They invested in One Month Rails (https://onemonthrails.com) so I am guessing they have some faith in that one -- or faith in their growth numbers.
Actually I agree with you somewhat, but in my experience a lot of what they're doing is trying to hype their thing, because that's the game they're playing. Underneath there's a huge amount of self-doubt.

Whereas the people I'm talking about, underneath there's a huge amount of noblesse oblige.
The market place cannot stop pollution, because the damage done by pollution is very often too large for the polluting company to ever pay to fix, assuming the company even still exists when the damage is found. If the company is long gone, there's nobody on the hook and the damage can't be fixed without using laws and taxes to do so.

And that's assuming we magically know who did the damage in the first place, and that it's something other than 'everyone'.
It's because browsers are unreliable about delivering async posts when the page navigates elsewhere. Some people proposed extending the web APIs to provide a reliable mechanism but it was shot down by complaints of "tracking". So now we're left with both tracking and horrible redirects.
Just because something is good for business doesn't mean that not doing it will cause a company to go out of business.

Maybe not (at least not immediately), but if something is "good for business", it must confer some competitive benefit. Otherwise what does "good for business" mean, exactly? And the competitive benefit is really enough to ground the question I was asking.
Have you experienced discrimination, or just the fear of social ostracism?
Moral of the story? Be the guy selling shovels.
> I'm curious why you think this....if "bigoted" ideas are delusional, shouldn't the fact that we have far more integration and exposure to different sub-cultures in sufficient time eliminate all bigotry, as it will eventually become self-evident that there are in fact no differences between people?

"In sufficient time," perhaps. In the meantime, millions of people are marginalized, exploited, abused, and killed. Those are real human beings, not just statistical stairsteps to Utopia, and I'd prefer to let them have freedom and equality now rather than reserving it for their great-great-great-grandchildren.
This assumes the invisible hand is fully rational and capable of the optimal decision making - at the very least at an aggregate scale.

It is possible for something to be good for business, but for the free market to not choose it. The free market, after all, is simply a collection of human participants, none of whom are perfectly informed nor perfectly rational.

There seems to be a weird belief in some circles that the free market tends to arrive naturally upon a globally optimal solution.
You're assuming, at the very least, that the competitive benefit of nondiscrimination exceeds the barriers to entry in the market.

Tim Cook was making the same assumption in the article when he said that workplace equality is good for business.

Also, the "barriers to entry" came from those state and local government regulations I referred to; asking the Federal government to provide a level playing field would have meant asking the Federal government to force state and local governments to remove those barriers to entry.
>Again, do you actually believe that the widespread discrimination against pre-civil rights blacks was rational behavior?

It absolutely was, because at that time in much of the country if you hired a black guy all his coworkers would refuse to work with him. White people would refuse to patronize your business.
Thanks for the correction, I'd missed that FB recently turned a profit.

If you consider all the investment in them, including the IPO, of course they are nowhere near profit on that, so now their problem is turning that $425m profit into something that justifies their valuation of $100 billion and pays back all their investors; that might take quite some time, however over a long enough time frame (if they last that long), they could pull it off.
PG's blogging is different. It does not inform the competition (much), but is INCREDIBLE outreach.

PG's essays are THE essays to read if you are an excellent entrepreneur - and if you are - and you make the decision to go to an accelerator - which one do you think you want to go to?
3.11 made a huge improvement for my wireless. Have you tried that?
And how often are you successful at saving a webpage using Google Chrome? You cannot even say because this bozo app fails to save in a majority of cases and never once raises an error.
A basic lack of fundamental core stability has driven me back in the the arms of Internet Exploder in the past 3 months.
When a PDF is saved, it is saved with the entire content intact in a single repository.
(Disclaimer: I work for Mashape). I found 2 marketing- related APIs when I searched for "marketing" in Mashape

- https://www.mashape.com/crosspollinate/crosspollinate-conten...

- https://www.mashape.com/amartin/ubersuggest
Realized after I posted. Too late to fix it. The only reason I made the mistake in the first place is that I wasn't sure if the pager would mess up text output.

(What? You expect me to print three or so pages to test an assumption about how *nix utilities work?)
Pollution is not the same as discrimination.
That some global optimizations with direct negative effects on a particular business outweigh their downstream positives for that business doesn't mean they all do. Perhaps this is more like Wal-Mart lobbying for higher minimum wage so that its customers have more money [1].

[1] http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/25/news/fortune500/walmart_wage...
Unicycle:

1. Lean forward and backward
2. Lean side to side
3. Twist
4. Pedal

Bicycle

1. Lean side to side
2. Twist handlebars
3. Pedal
Q: How many Randian Objectivists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A: None. The market will take care of it.
PowerCfg - The hidden energy and battery tool for Windows
Where were all of those entrepreneurs fixing the system through competitive advantage?

They were prevented from doing so by government regulations--state and local government regulations.
Announcing the inaugural winner of the Malcolm Tredinnick Memorial Prize
It says one of my sites isn't blocked when other tools I have tried says it is.

I actually want it to be blocked in China.
minor edit. Tobi is the founder of Shopify, not Spotify.
You know, when you make an interesting statement like this one, you have to keep quiet and let it sink. Let others debate on it and such. Go on with your day. But if you keep arguing and arguing, it loses all its value.

He should have gone to sleep after that.
What else is running on my EC2 instance?
I never thought that I would get to quote Jane Austen on HN, but here's a perfect one :
"Yes, vanity is a weakness indeed. But pride - where there is a real superiority of mind, pride will be always under good regulation."

So says Mr Darcy before he realises that he's actually a bit of a dick...
There seems to be a weird belief in some circles that the free market tends to arrive naturally upon a globally optimal solution.

There is a much more widespread weird belief that governments can do so, even though the track record of governments is worse than the track record of free markets.
Art certainly can't stop the proliferation of refuse in landfills around the world. That is very much an industrial problem.
Walmart was paying above minimum wage when they lobbied for that change. They were in favor of the wage rise because it would harm their competitors - and give them positive PR as most of their critics were unaware that Walmart paid above minimum wage.

My source is the (then) CEO of Walmart.
The thing is that some form of genocide was carried out during soviet times, thus suppressing development of the nations intelligence, with many from the best and brightest being deported/surpressed etc.
Westerners usually does not understand that what ended in the West after WWII did not end in the Baltic states, it continued, just in a bit "softer" form. Yes, it was not war, but it was not actual peace either.
Really? Your argument is from WSJ? That proves that the invisible hand of the market can work this out? I knew libertarianism was sort of naive but surely you jest ... WSJ is hardly known for scientific rigor. I mean this is hard to take seriously. I don't know where to begin.

How good would the article be if we were in a time that people may freely be as racist as they want and there were not any social stigmas in the majority about being racist and such racism was commonplace? You would have widespread discrimination and your silly little wouldn't solve anything about it. For those playing at home, this was the status quo in the US at one point. You may argue, as libertarians may, that this is all perfectly fine and is the "moral" way but as usual, with your view of "freedom" we would not have a world many would want to live in.
I like that in this version you ignore the problem of what happens to BitCoin when no one spends it and everyone just hordes it.
Much more widespread? Last I checked nobody is advocating for Soviet-style central planning. In fact by far the most popular notion in the western world is a mostly-free market with some regulation.

Which seems to jive with the notion that neither a monolithically planned, nor entirely laissez-faire system, are likely to produce optimal results.
Sounds like bad organizations to work for.
> Someone in Venezuela putting USD under his mattress isn't investing?

No they're not. They're trying to lose money against inflation more slowly. 10 years from now that $1000 USD will still be a $1000 USD, but it'll buy a lot less.
Looking for beta testers for new speed reading training app
> So, my reverse question is where would you go to find folks who want to work on Open Source.

I could do it for you. But I'm not a PHP programmer and don't live in Austin. That's probably why you're having trouble finding people. I could also get together a remote team and manage or work with them for you. It's what I did for my last client (actually, an Austin company as well).
Practical example about how to use wookmark.js in a pictures website
more information about wookmark can be found it here: http://www.wookmark.com/jquery-plugin