skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Like a lot of people, Simon seems sincere in his concerns about America and our future. Unfortunately, most people's sincerity isn't deep enough for them to question their fundamental moral premises. I won't argue the case for Capitalism here but to say that there are answers but most people do not want to hear them.

People are realizing that we as a society are faced with a horrible moral and political dilemma. The moral ideal is Socialism and yet where ever it is tried consistently it fails. Our moral evil is Capitalism and yet where ever it is tried it leads to material success but moral decay. So the dilemma of our age is a moral-practical dichotomy that no one seems to be able to resolve. It is understandable that people like Simon issue a call to double down on the moral ideal of Socialism, that's what morality is for, to tell us what we should do. But his "solution" is that maybe we can make it work this time if we don't impose Marx's dictum too consistently. Maybe this time "need" won't expand beyond all bound and "ability" won't vanish. This time.

This approach will fail too. To escape our dilemma we need to question our morality instead of imposing another Socialist failure in America. I hope we can avoid this fate but I am not optimistic. If you are sincerely interested in these issues then I urge you to read two books by Ayn Rand; Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal and The Virtue of Selfishness.
"So you -- whoever you may be -- you have to learn responsibility, and be subjected to market discipline, it's good for your character, it's tough love, and so on, and so forth. But me, I need the nanny State, to protect me from market discipline, so that I'll be able to rant and rave about the marvels of the free market, while I'm getting properly subsidized and defended by everyone else, through the nanny State. And also, this has to be risk-free. So I'm perfectly willing to make profits, but I don't want to take risks. If anything goes wrong, you bail me out."

Noam Chomsky, "Free Market Fantasies: Capitalism in the Real World": http://www.chomsky.info/talks/19960413.htm
No, you've got your definitions mixed up. You're talking about the free market. Capitalism is about capital; that is, investment with the goal of profit. The only way to sustain continued investment and subsequent profit is to have growth.
I think it is difficult for most people to conceptualize how short a time period that is since they haven't even lived that long.
AFAIK SSL Observatory only sends the certs you receive to a EFF server to be included in a DB, it doesn't protects you against MITM's.

A great add-on for Firefox that helps you to detect any possible MITM is Certificate Patrol (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/certificate-p...), it may be a bit annoying for some people though.

X.509 is broken, it only protects you against casual script kiddies on Starbucks. I know about people who deleted the CA directory from their systems, in my case I prefer to use Certificate Patrol (both in Firefox and Thunderbird) or use self-signed certs and then pgp sign the fingerprint.
I'm watching the P = NP right now and it is amazing. Thanks for the hint :-)
Yes, most unemployed people are probably much older than 18. However most people making the decision to go to college, or go into various trades, are 18 or younger. That seems to be the age bracket Mike Rowe is primarily talking about.
>> I specifically mean that libertarians don't view property rights as forceful, but the left does.

I don't know what kind of libertarianism you're referring to, exactly. But property is based on property rights, is it not? It makes no sense to think that you have no rights in the absence of a government. Think about it. If there's no government, would you not have the right to defend yourself or your property against an aggressor? -Of course you would. Governments have nothing to do with that.

>> If it's not a possibility that can happen in the actual world, then the statement is basically meaningless

The statement means what it means, even if only as a sentence.

But look, I already acknowledged that not everyone adheres to the NAP. That can't be helped now, and it probably can't be helped ever. But the number of people who aggress against others can sure be reduced through peaceful, sensible, consistent parenting, for example.

The fact that not every single goddamn human being out there is good is not a reason to dismiss libertarian/free-market/anarchist ideas. You'll have to do way better than that, but ultimately, you'll find that reason, logic, and evidence should / can not be dismissed at all.
> If you're implying that we need to madly slash all government operations, I think that's pretty misguided.

I am always amused when folks take a simple statement ("It's astonishing that, in a nearly 3,000 word speech calling the United States a 'horror show', the word debt is used not once.") and read into it suggestions that are neither expressed nor implied.

> We're actually running a secondary surplus right now, given that the rate of inflation is higher than the extremely low interest rates on our national debt.

There are always justifications for reckless behavior ("Yes, I'm spending a lot of money, but I'm paying 0% interest for 18 months thanks to my new credit card's introductory offer!"), but given that interest rates can't get much lower, an exercise you might find valuable is to calculate the cost of servicing the national debt as interest rates rise. For reference, although the CBO isn't great at predicting the future, they expect the interest rate on the 10y to be at 5.2% in 2023 and that annual interest payments on the debt will be $823 billion.
> Right now capital has effectively purchased the government

Which is the reason people no longer trust any government, which is why libertarianism seems the way forward, and any thoughts like these sound like 'reactionary' voices from the past. It seems to me that the linear progression towards absolute personal freedom which started with the Enlightenment is only going to go forward, which will realize many of the fears expressed in the article. The newer generations seem to be very comfortable with the idea of the oncoming law of the jungle, and seem very comfortable with their nationally neutral, atomic, unassociated social network identities. I doubt there will be a shift towards socialist ideals any time soon. The empowerment of the poor is already considered a technical problem to be solved by the startup ecosystem.
>> Individuals are the entities that make decisions,

The fundamental problem here is that most individuals don't want anything to do with managing trust. In fact it's not even that, it's that they don't know what trust means, they have no interest in learning and many of them are not even capable of doing so.

The problem that TLS and the authority system try to solve is "how do I set up a secure, trusted connection between two parties who have never met, one of whom has probably never even heard of a key pair". Individually managed trust graphs don't really help there. AFAICT.

>> any emergent authority that violates the trust of those individuals gets booted by enough they cease to be an authority.

Absolutely. But any system should be examined with game theory in mind, and I don't see that web-of-trust is necessarily immune, nor do I see that it pre-empts the kind of problem we see here - trusted parties acting badly for money/legal/government reasons.

I may be wrong, and would actually quite like to be.
Lol you can't get hired....
Your argument only addresses money/economy. Your conclusion is not warranted.
Shameful Profiling of the Mentally Ill
Aren't "implementation side effects" leading to a mismatch between a user's expected behavior and the actual behavior a bug? Where's the line? :)

More seriously I don't think Arc is a good idea for an HN clone; the lispiness of it all is cute but the way continuations are implemented doesn't seem to scale in a good way in real life. Some form of cursoring like what Reddit uses for pagination is probably better. Plus the news example couples the layout/theme to the UI code in painful ways.
You might want to link to this page - http://codingbean.com/parrot/discussion/Welcome
Here's what I tell my wife's family and my family. If you feel like gifting, DO NOT get us physical gifts, we don't have the space and there's a 99.99% chance you will not be right in your gift selection.

We'd love to have a call or card, but if you must spend money, gift cards to specific merchants, (insert list), or cash are acceptable.
Having a social relationship with someone != caring about their fate.

I think you aren't understanding the mechanism of the theory - which goes beyond the original paper. It has less to do with being able to "be social" (a broader function) than it does with being able to empathize with someone. Empathy is directly related to size and activity within the neocortex.

[1] http://www.pnas.org/content/100/9/5497.long
Give them money - they know what they want.
That sounds like a great setup. Care to give more details?
How are TACK and convergence related? Is one the better version of the other?
Airvoice has 10/month for 250 minutes
There's no need to quibble about "lifeboat scenarios". You can come up with countless scenarios where there needs to be an "exception" to the NAP, but that's pointless, and a waste of time. It changes nothing about NAP itself, or its basis.

You'll break a rule when you have to, and that's it. It's very simple. If you're in the desert, dying of thirst and someone comes along and starts trying to force you to pay a ridiculous price for some water, then of course you'll do whatever you can to get some. But no sane, independent, objective "court" would punish you for that.

For a clearer picture, start coming up with scenarios where you could adhere to the NAP with zero effort at all.
Thanks. I just downloaded the free version. Seems rife with typos - example:

While you are may be reading this book out of curiosity, we hope it interests
you in learning more about using Sun Tzu’s system to make better decision.

Also uses difficult-to-follow formatting. Concludes with an infomercial-esque sales pitch for additional products:

At this point, you have to make a decision. This is appropriate because Sun Tzu teaches the science of making better decisions. At this point, are you satisfied just being able to say you read The Art of War? Or do you want to develop real skills you will use every day?
"Central European Retaliation Militia" Opps, everyone at CERN is on a "no fly" list now...
http://beagleboard.org/products/beaglebone%20black
A Quantitative Study of StackOverflow
Methinks one of the NYT commenters nails it best. In practice, many couples eventually find a sweet spot where one party reluctantly performs more chores than it would naturally do, while the other party either tolerates a lot more filth than it wants to or copes with an uneven share of the household chores -- usually both.

That being said, and as a few female commenters astutely point out, the article's author would gain some additional perspective by having a few children in his household. Cleaning up baby puke and a 4-person household's mountain of laundry isn't in the same ballpark as worrying about vacuuming a two-adult household's rug the next day.
I wonder is 4 hours of work is sufficient?
>>if you go down this road you will be battling perceptions, not reality.

Thanks @beachstartup for bringing out these key points.
I use my real name, and I quite frankly do not care if I get passed up for a job or something like that because of something I said online. I'm pretty sure any employer I would actually want to work for wouldn't care about me ranting about the NSA or something (might even get me a job, who knows). That being said, I do not say anything online that I wouldn't in real life (except perhaps on IRC channels where I use a nick) and it's seemed to work out ok so far.
They call these "PPP" public private partnerships. What happens is cronies of the ruling party are given money to avoid risk and get to run the business extracting all profits for themselves. The taxpayer is told hey this would cost 10x as much if we ran it.
Sweden knew about the Russia-Georgia war before the US: report
May we ask what you do now? Does this industry employ programmers? Do you have management experience that could hep you justify a job as a project manager?
The bedroom tax is not a nudge.

Cultural note: UK has a benefit called "Housing benefit". It pays rent for people in certain circumstances. Years ago people renting from a private landlord had limits imposed about the size of property they could rent - they were not allowed to be over accommodated. (Or they could be, but they wouldn't get that rate for the property and they'd need to make up the difference). Recently this rule has been applied to people renting from the public sector - local council housing and housing association properties.

In theory it creates liquidity in the property market, and makes sure people are in the right size homes and getting the right amount of benefit. In practice people who can only afford to live in council housing cannot afford to move, even if there were other properties available for them. (And there usually aren't, and even less so now that so many people are looking to move.)

In this situation a nudge would be finding the sticking point of why people stay in properties with too many rooms and finding a way to help them move. Offering to ebay extra possessions, allowing them to fit into a smaller home, would be a nudge. Offering help with removal vans or other logistics might be a nudge.

Cutting benefit to poor people is a kludge.
It's also about establishing a network. Join some meet-ups in your area. Ask questions. Start contracting. Find a mentor (older or younger). Usual stuff.
I'm reading that very same ten pound note. On the side which bears the image of Queen Elizabeth II, it says:

Bank of England
I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of TEN Pounds

Regarding what is returned...

Whatever I buy with the ten pounds is what I get in return from the seller. When I pass the ten pound note over, the Bank of England now has liability towards the seller, not myself.
I mean all those that subscribe to the NAP: minarchists, 'right libertarians,' voluntaryists, and 'anarcho-capitalists.'

> Think about it.

I have thought about it, and so have many others. This argument is pretty old and tired, and goes way beyond this thread. There have been many criticisms of the NAP by anarchists. The actual, original strain of anarchists: 'left anarchism.'
Thanks @andy1. That was one of my plans.
For me, I find myself scared to participate using my real name. I think it's mostly a lack of self-confidence. I actually just registered this username last night, hoping that anonymity will help me get over my fear of posting. Maybe in the future I'll be more comfortable/confident and use my real name, but for now, an anonymous username will be my crutch.
That is exactly what the government expects. It is a catch-22 (you can't know that you are on the list (through official channels anyway) unless you sue them into confirming it, and you can't sue them unless you can prove that you are on the list. A seemingly insurmountable circular dependency.), and it is by design.
Translating can be hard, especially when dealing with old dead languages. Just look at all thus different English text for John 14:2 http://biblehub.com/john/14-2.htm .

"My Father's house has many rooms" and "There is more than enough room in my Father's home" may not mean the same at all, especially when taken out of its original context.
You can exploit the fact that the utility of money has an asymptote (steep rise, in real systems) near the threshold of survivability to justify welfare policies too.

Libertarians whine about arbitrary confiscation of wealth by the government, but they have no problem when competition drives the price of labor down to (or below!) the price of survivability, even though from the point of view of the poor person both justifications for taking their money are equally arbitrary. The government promises to use the money to help people (translation: to fill rich peoples' pockets). The market promises to use the money to increase efficiency (translation: to fill rich peoples' pockets). The question is which party is better at delivering on their promise. You have noticed that the government isn't great at delivering on their part of the bargain. I would like to add that the market isn't stellar at this either. I believe the market tends to be worse (i.e. that "trickle down" is less realistic than "bubble up"), but I must admit that this belief is the product of my political beliefs rather than the other way around.
Gold is used in parts of the engine of the Mclaren F1 supercar, because of its inert properties.
I am prejudiced against people who use their real names when the website allows them to use a nickname: I automatically assume they will be uninteresting, their opinions sheepish and will always avoid confrontation or controversial ideas. I feel like they are always talking in the presence of their mother.
This year I've been recommending a donation in their name to a Watsi patient: https://watsi.org/

It's not the best match for every hacker but for those that care about what Watsi does then it's a really amazing gift.
He has a B.S. in mathematics too. I imagine that was useful as well.
Actually, it won't be so easy. Avastin is a biologic drug, so it's not possible for generic manufacturers to produce an exactly equivalent product.

Eventually, generic manufacturers may be able to compete (the generic clones of biologic drugs are called biosimilars), but it will take a long time and significant resources, because they will need to run new clinical trials to show that the new drugs are equivalent:

Because different manufacturers may produce slightly different products, they consequently cannot guarantee that their version is exactly as safe and effective as the original manufacturer's version. So, unlike most drugs, generic versions of biologics were not authorized in the United States or the European Union through the simplified procedures allowed for small-molecule generics. As a result, nearly all biologics have been brand-name therapeutics and required very extensive testing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologic_medical_product#Biosim...

The FDA gained the authority to approve biosimilars (including interchangeables that are substitutable with their reference product) as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed by President Obama on March 23, 2010 - none have yet been approved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosimilar#Approval_processes
Do you have a particular area of expertise outside of programming?

If you can blend non-programming expertise with a growing ability to develop reliable software, you might be able to make youself employable sooner rather than later.
If you want to contribute to the thread, link to the comments on the previous posts. Otherwise, the fact that this has been posted before (apparently 3 years ago..) doesn't make it less interesting now.

> Animated map of nuclear explosions, 1945-1998 (pinktentacle.com) 58 points by gnosis 3 years ago | 26 comments | cached

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1586544
Already saw this link weeks before.
Secret New Drone Shows Stealth, Efficiency Advances
No, that's not your point. That's one of your supporting arguments. Your actual point is "Therefore, TheZenPsycho should not have criticized me."

No, that's not my point. My point is dealing with humorless gits like you and Zen is just wearisome. I should be "ashamed" fro replying to a comment to say that I like a TV show? Yeesh, get over yourselves.

Seriously, it's just exhausting talking to people like you. I'm sure both of you are a blast to be around in real life (that was sarcasm in case it was lost on you).
It's a good idea to have some information online for your real name that you control. Otherwise eventually someone else will write some things about you that you can't control and that will be what comes up first in Google.
> It really makes you question the structure that puts in place the original polices this group "nudges".

Nudge is a new thing. Hopefully it'll get baked into all current and future policy planning, along with good evidence bases and proper science.

We've had laws and regulations piled on for many many years, so they do need a bit of fixing. And sometimes it's better to use a nudge ("We'll help clear your attic!") than impose a new law ("Insulate or face a fine").

Having a single department focus on little things now is a useful exercise to demonstrate to all the bureaucrats that nudging is real and works, and needs to be implemented.
The video above for Don't Starve shows the game saying that it is generating the world.
Controling power outlets via Bluetooth
They're well detailed, but the vector sources are little messy (stray points, lack descriptive titles) so you'll want to clean them up.
You are missing a few use cases.

1. The employment based conversion to a green card process.

2. The current setup seems to be designed from the perspective of someone who is being sponsored by a U.S. citizen (marriage or family based). E.g. I went through the process of selecting "Adjustment of status". Now the AoS happens in situations other than sponsorship. E.g. I got a diversity lottery and then did an adjustment of status here in the U.S.

In general, if you really have a background of well qualified immigration attorneys, you really need to leverage that know how in the process. The visa process is as much art as it is science. E.g. when I went for the visa interview, the only question he asked me was for my pay stub. Not really a super necessary document in this situation because I was eligible (by virtue of having a Masters degree) for this process. This sort of preparation comes not from reading the application but having know how through experience.

Also $79 is rather low if the objective is "End to end Green card application support". I frankly would be skeptical as to how good the support will be. This is not to say that there aren't lawyers who take $10K and do nothing. But you really need to up your price point to take into account the fact that there is a psychological belief that the best lawyer is an expensive one.
I stand firmly behind everything I do on the internet or otherwise knowing full well the capability for people to take things out of context or cherry pick.

Having it out there allows for a full audit of what I am doing on the back end. On the front end, it ensures I am thinking through what I am writing so that I can ensure it reflects what I intend it to even if it is not all positive.
My favorite example of an underground nuclear explosion was project gasbuggy, near where I grew up. They thought it might be useful if they could perform nuclear fracking:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gasbuggy

Where they performed the test is a very beautiful area.

Part of a larger project to actually perform nuclear terra-forming:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,899941,...

> Someone shouted: "We did it! We did it!" Hand shakes were exchanged all around. The U.S. had successfully set off the first nuclear explosion sponsored jointly by the Government and industry.
Interesting post, but the author is 28, not 40 like the OP.
Really? Without money/economy you have, I don't know, Afganistan? Like it or not prosperity isn't driven by government programs. It is driven by private sector economic activity. Unless we are talking Start Trek utopia this is how the world turns today and will continue to do so for quite some time.

My conclusion is supported by fact, data and experience beyond what could be covered in a twenty line HN post. Government, as currently devolved in the US, is very much the problem. The solution is less of it. Radically less. Everywhere.
Just beefing up the server. Two ticks ;)