skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Prostitutes are registered workers, they pay taxes and must pass monthly health checks.

I fully support this. STIs are one of the biggest public costs of prostitution.

(Yes, this is a public cost. Every time a new person is infected with (e.g.) HIV, from an epidemiological perspective, that increases the chances of some copy of the virus in some person mutating into a virulent - even airborne - version. This is why you should care about HIV infection rates, even if you practice safe sex and don't use IV drugs, etc.[0])

> On other side many people lost unemployment support, because they refused to work in brothel as cleaners or maintenance personnel.

How is that any different from refusing to work in a hotel or a hospital as a janitor (or even as a nurse[1])?

They may not like the line of work, but that's no different from disliking taking a job at Halliburton. While I sympathize with the goal of choosing a job ethically, in the US (not sure about Germany), unemployment benefits and requirements aren't designed with that in mind.

[0] Even "curable" STIs are a public health problem We are already on the verge of creating - if we haven't already created - strains of gonorrhea that are resistant to all antibiotic treatments.

[1] You wouldn't believe some of the stuff nurses in hospitals have to put up with on a daily basis.
Seconded! I enjoyed the Tron sequel. I almost leaped out of my chair yelling "EMACS!!" in the office scene. Almost..

Here's an article about some of the visual effects in Tron (and emacs!): http://jtnimoy.net/?q=178
Yes, it is true that the major performance gains are for a (commonly used) subset of what is possible in SQL. But you need to keep in mind that you don't have to de-normalize or adopt some sort of design pattern in OrientDB for some use cases you would in SQL, instead you can just model your data.
hah, I just wanted to post this! Dear catshirt, you were faster =)
I am really curious on the differences between om an pump, do you already have any practical experience with any of these, so you can share your insight?

tbh. I found out about pump, by reading the github issues in OM.
Bloody Heels - Hungry For Your Love (Official Video)
Here is the court case that brought this ruling: Bedford v. Canada

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_v._Canada
Author, please stop taking words so literally. This isn't that complicated. If I'm on a startups website and I want to apply for a job there I will look for two words. Those words are "jobs" and "careers" and to me (and probably most) they mean the same damn thing. Nobody arrives at a website and sees careers and automatically thinks anything you talked about.
It's cutting off your nose to spite your face. You're saying it's better for middle class families to just head out to the suburbs, where their kids will really be assured of never having to interact with poor people as human beings, than for them to live in the same city and pay into the same tax base while allowing wealthier neighborhoods to have their own local schools.

At least if middle class families live in the city, there is some hope of gradual integration. Through measures like Section 8, which often pays for low-income families to live in nicer neighborhoods, urban schools in wealthier areas can be 10-20% low-income. Parents will tolerate that. It's the 80-90% low-income schools, which make up the vast majority of urban schools, that they won't tolerate.
Plus, think about the possibilities for use of the word "nom".
The only people who do this are people who came from places with even worse weather (cf. references to the Northeast in your parent comment). People used to e.g. LA or South Bay have a different perspective.
Emacs is extremely extensible. Some people use it as-is out of the box and are happy with it, others treat it more like a framework for creating text editors.

Sublime has plugins, but it's nothing compared to the Emacs ecosystem. I can edit code in one pane, manage my git repository in another, have a terminal to run tests in a third pane, chat with a co-worker with Jabber in another, and look up documentation in a browser (w3m) in yet another pane. The merge conflict resolution capabilities in Emacs are also pretty excellent. I'd say they're at least on par with Vim's excellent Fugitive plugin.

Org mode is a thing of beauty. You can write notes (and enable spell checking in the buffer), create TODO lists, spreadsheets, calendars, handle time tracking, and even embed executable snippets from various languages. The coolest Org mode story I've heard is about Avdi Grimm. He wrote a Ruby book in Org mode and embedded his code right in it. With a single Emacs command he could extract the code from the book and run specs against it, and also package the whole thing up as an ebook.

The learning curve doesn't have to be as brutal as depicted in the blog post. I've only been using Emacs for 4-5 months, and I'm already very efficient with it. I've changed a lot of the keybindings to match what I'm already familiar with, so I didn't learn Emacs as much as I made Emacs learn me.

I used Sublime for years before my switch to Emacs (with a 3 month layover in Vim Land). Sublime is really easy to use, and I still recommend it for designers who write a bit of code, people new to programming, and people who just aren't interested in learning new tools. That said, I spend 90% of my time writing code, and it's great to have an editor that can trivially be made to do whatever I want it to.
According to Wiki, he's working for Google: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Budge
The Tron squeal was awesome!
This reassures me since I know you are not asshole.

I'm sold.
As anyone who has actually read any of the articles about this can tell you, they did not actually overturn squat. The laws are still in effect and still being enforced. What happened is they gave the legislature a year to revise the laws to make them constitutional, but until then nothing has changed and there's a good chance these laws will be revised before the deadline.
My point was that you reaction would not have substantively changed if you happened to be a white American female or a black American male.

Even taking into account the fact that Africans Americans are more religious as a group than their white counterparts, I don't think religiousity (except in the most extreme examples) would affect one's initial distaste upon reading the phrase

> Sometime it is very difficult for human to understand GOD and his punishment !

in that context.

My initial negative reaction was due mostly to the fact that I'm a native English speaker - which is where the misunderstanding stems from as well.
> half-baked Facebook clone

It is better than Facebook in every possible way.

Have you actually ever used VK (both the site and the mobile apps)?
Show me the slides I want to see the evidence myself. All I am seeing now is the words of various reporters.

I am trying to grasp at something that would justify it. Its beyond belief that they are actually doing this. Who's the good guys in this world or are the "people" the only good guys left?
What advantages would those be? Do they still apply when compared to a modern strongly-typed language with type inference and typeclass-like functionality, like Scala?
Every organization generates information of some kind; nation states especially, but even aid groups and corporations. Spying on the heads of these organizations is a very efficient way to get at the most important, post-filtered information these groups have uncovered or generated.

If you assume NSA spying net benefits the United States, then a U.S. citizen should count it beneficial that the extent of the surveillance is so comprehensive. If you don't, or have interests not aligned with the U.S., these revelations are pretty horrible.
Lego downplays national identity
Thanks, I was going for the definition of primes but was just going a bit loopy about the negation. I didn't want to trim surplus characters until I understood it but yes I can see those brackets are unnecessary.
Turn ASCII into sequence diagrams
Did you watch the video? I'm not referring to monads simulating something. I'm referring to the observation that when reading code you are simulating its execution. My understanding of the video's complaint against monads is that the signature of monads is actually quite simple and well understood in different contexts by different names.

The video goes on to display an environment where you do not have to simulate the code in your head.

This progression seems somewhat interesting to me. As does the desire to not have to simulate code in your head.
I find that it is hard to distinguish between psycopathy and narcissism. This person seems like a pathological narcissist not a psychopath. This person is ego tripping by self identifying with something they find powerful. A psychopath may have similar hangups but they don't believe in their own bullshit and would not waste time with self reflection or therapy. Psycopathy is like depression; psycopaths do crazy shit because they can't feel.
Hey Facebook, Line is introducing video ads that users will be paid to watch
It reminded me, as most things do, of the writings of Erich Fromm... what he said about sadism, that is. The desire to look down on, control and/or hurt others seems like a "consolation prize", like the highest you can achieve when you can't really live constructively, when you're deathly afraid of uncertainty and new things. The need to be able to strategically assess flaws in others to exploit ultimately speaks of fear, or at least lack of vision/capability. I mean, just imagine being around people you love wherever you are... all the stuff others work for without ever getting it, you have all the time, for free; welcome to compassion, step right in! :D

Also, maybe I am wrong, but I don't think there are people who "just are" psychopaths? I mean, if it's chemical/hormonal, it could theoretically fixed that way... and if it's not, then it might not be "fixable", but it's not magic either, and layers and layers and layers of defense, redirections and rationalizations are expected. Nobody wants to accept that the center of their pearl is some banal, useless, accidental piece of dirt someone else or the wind put there. But that's usually what it is, I think. And pearls can kill, they're not pretty at all. They're like a scab turned cancer.

I agree that considering psychopaths as some spooky "other" is silly, it's all a matter of degree, and I guess we only call it psychopathic once it crosses a threshold. That is, I doubt anyone here can claim they never used someone, or calculated more coldly than they let on, or looked down on sentimentality when they didn't feel sentimental about a particular thing. Or maybe I'm projecting, I don't know. I know putting others down because I felt crappy, and for me that letter sounds like a much more elaborate and Machiavellian version, but still kinda the same.

TL;DR: The thing about the powerful is that they're not, that's why they need power, and of course the alligator part of the brain gets real good if that's all you use. Use your mammal brain to see what a small achievement that really is.
I hate to logic-chop a civilian (i.e. someone who didn't waste their youth in an analytic philosophy department studying ethics) but here we go.

If your position is that all convincing self-accounts by psychopaths are themselves only convincing because the psychopath is somehow 'tricking' you, then you can take that statement and s/psychopath/any group you care to name/ and you'd never know the difference.

Don't believe me? Try substituting various bogeymen of the twentieth century: crack dealers, pedophiles, etc. You see what I mean? It always works: You shouldn't trust what pedophiles say because, well, they're pedophiles!

Generalizing, there's always a reason why someone's supposed perfidy makes them an untrustworthy speaker, and that's a problem.

One floor down, what's going on is 'begging the question' -- not in the colloquial motivates-the-question sense, but in the sense that you are assuming what you set out to prove (circular reasoning).

Watch:

CLAIM = C is a psychopath; therefore, don't trust him when he says C is good.

CLAIM' = X is a Y; therefore, don't believe X's claim that Z.

But there's still an implicit claim hiding! In fact, it's the value of Z. Let's suss it out:

CLAIM'' = X is a Y; Ys are untrustworthy; therefore, don't believe X when X says that Ys are trustworthy.

There you have it: a textbook case of circular reasoning. That's the sort of thing C is talking about: people get so emotional when they think about psychopaths, they fail to hold themselves up to the same standards for rational discourse at which a psychopath ironically excels.
Indeed.

Let's not pretend everyone has it equal.
Fun idea! I just signed up with an old domain, hope someone else might have the time to do something hilarious with it.
improved, gives 80

^(x|(xx){1,9}|x{32}|(x{64})+)$
Well put it this way: if you say you wish you'd spent more time with your family that's not going to upset anyone. If you say you wish you'd spent less time with them and more time doing something else, that's not very nice.
> No, historically the Senators are supposed to represent the governments of the states.

No, historically, the Senators were supposed to represent the governments of the states.

You can argue that that design should be restored, but merely pointing out that it used to be that way is hardly an argument.

> The amendment screwed that up and we have seen all kinds of budget and regulatory bloat.

There's a very loose temporal association (in that the purported effect did happen after the purported cause, but not particularly closely after) with the rapid expansion of the national regulation, but not much other indication of causation; even among Constitutional amendments that were enacted in 1913, you'd have a stronger case for blaming the 16th amendment for that then the 17th (though, there's probably an even stronger argument that the 16th and 17th amendments were both effects of the same trend in nationalization that later led to the expansion of the national regulatory expansion than that either is really a strong contributor to it.)
It's faster, but it's not remarkably faster, no. The main place it becomes faster is deep joins - if you want the friend of the friend of the friend. If using joins that looks like LEFT OUTER JOIN bla a1 LEFT OUTER JOIN bla a2 LEFT OUTER JOIN bla a3 etc. If you've got much experience with SQL you should realize the performance impact of that. So graph dbs are best suited to highly networked problems.

Denormalize is something different, you're misunderstanding something I've said. With a graph DB, you still only have 1 copy of each person - you are just storing the 'joins' or ids/addresses of the 'rows' you want to join with ahead of time.

I certainly did not say that joins are bad, I was just answering your questions as to how a graph db differs and why it would perform better in certain specific circumstances. If you're in those circumstances then a graph DB is very useful.

Another nice part of a graph db is if you have a large collection of different objects in your programming language that all interact with each other. Those interactions can be stored directly in-line and allow for an ORM layer to be more efficient when retrieving the whole collection.
DJB! If you could get him out of his cave at UIC.
After 27 years, that joke is still fresh as ever. /s
> As for your aside, how so?

CLOS multimethods do not "belong" to an object or even to a class declaration. Particular implementations of generic methods are declared globally, just like Haskell type class instances. Although, as Peaker noted, type classes can dispatch on any part of the type signature. It is impossible to make a CLOS multimethod with signature:

(SomeClass a b) => String -> (a, b)

> Perhaps a discussion we can have over email if you're interested.

Sorry, I never check email. But I am almost always on Freenode. My nick is pyon.

> You sound smart.

Not really. The regulars in #haskell - now they are frigging smart.
Next big idea: Uber for sex.
IDEas: Tools for Coders
i think its more like they can't feel. stay safe of course but have pity, you've been born healthy in this regard
> If your position is that all convincing self-accounts by psychopaths are themselves only convincing because the psychopath is somehow 'tricking' you, then you can take that statement and s/psychopath/any group you care to name/ and you'd never know the difference.
Don't believe me? Try substituting various bogeymen of the twentieth century: crack dealers, pedophiles, etc. You see what I mean? It always works: You shouldn't trust what pedophiles say because, well, they're pedophiles!

Your logic chop fails because one of the elements of psychopathy is being a convincing liar.
Microsoft Opens Xbox Music API to Developers
Ask HN: How do you manage your food allergies?
I currently run a site that deals with nutrition labels, and am thinking of creating a side product line dealing with food allergies. Our dataset contains all common ingredients (from the USDA), but we have some extra tagging if an ingredient has a milk, egg, fish, shellfish, tee nuts, wheat, peanuts, or soy beans allergy.

The first idea I have is to create a simple ingredient checker where you can look at a common ingredient and see if it has any of the common allergies. (Random fact: did you know buckwheat flour is gluten free -- assuming it isn't cross contaminated?)

Does anyone here with food allergies have any insights?
I hope that no one gives away a domain that has a trademark or trademark "typo" in it.
Then pile on the fact that I've tried to use my AX legitimately to buy hardware over the last month and was denied 2 separate times because it 'seemed suspicious'. Really makes you wish for a more secure payment system which can be used for such transactions.
^[a-f]*$

Is the same length too.
GIF: The jood, the bad, and ujly
Aside from whether or not this method of linking data increases performance, there is a huge cost in relational databases to the complexity created by many-to-many relationships. Even if the performance were the same, the dispersion of data makes it a nightmare to pull together a hierarchical object out of many different database tables, and then to deduplicate the data that is cross-joined (ie in the case of a user with multiple shipping addresses...join user on address => you get the same user record for every instance of address, which then has to be consolidated in code). Then do that times 5-10 other tables and you have yourself a very messy query that is very slow.

These problems can be solved with KV stores, but at the cost of human readable databases. Likewise, with ORMs, you sacrifice performance and direct understanding of how the database is being queried.

There are many advantages to a document-graph model like orientdb for these reasons.
I'm pretty sure the Vooza guys already joked about this.

EDIT:

Finally, a use for all those questionably-named Rails gems!
Most people who turn to sex workers are people that have no access sex otherwise or who need, for some reason, to go see elsewhere.

Three choices here:
1. Prostitution
2. Rape
3. One nights

One is an health risk, another is simply wrong... prostitution is expensive.

I would gladly give those people access to better, healthier, more regulated services.
Strongly seconded.

On the one hand, if you install a "starter kit" like Prelude and it works properly, then it might give you a little boost up the initial slope of the learning curve, but it's going to slow you down later on because you're learning how Emacs + Prelude does things rather than how Emacs does things. This becomes problematic when you try to interact with Emacs users unfamiliar with Prelude, because they don't have any knowledge of the changes Prelude makes to the environment, some of which result in incompatibilities between Emacs + Prelude and just plain Emacs. (I've run into this when answering Stack Overflow questions, to the extent that if I see a question where the asker mentions using Prelude, and it's not immediately obvious that the problem at hand could not possibly be related to Prelude's changes, I just pass on by.)

On the other hand, if you install a "starter kit" like Prelude and it doesn't work properly, then you're pretty much boned, because you have no knowledge of what the misbehavior you're seeing signifies, or how to hunt it down and fix it. Not only does your editor not work right (or at all), but, because you've installed something which advertises itself as solving a newbie's every problem, you're not mentally prepared to deal with something going wrong. Worse, you've just had your initial experience with Emacs spoiled by brokenness; worse still, you aren't likely to know enough about Emacs to recognize that it's Prelude to blame, so you end up with a poor opinion of Emacs that really isn't its own fault.

Just start learning Emacs. If you can figure out how to write code in the first place, learning Emacs is not all that hard, and before very long you'll wonder why you ever thought you'd need training wheels.
It's easy to either over-demonize or underestimate the nature of actual psychopathy if you've never encountered it. By definition, a pure psychopath feels absolutely no remorse, no guilt, and has an unshakable egocentric view that does not change. They're effectively intelligent rational agents without the natural mammal-evolved desire to benefit the group -- they only seek to benefit the self. They would stab you in the back both figuratively and literally without the slightest hesitation or emotional reservation, so long as they know the benefits to them sufficiently outweigh the risks.

You can no more teach a psychopath to be caring and empathic than you can teach someone with autism to implicitly understand social context and facial expressions. However, a psychopath will be thrilled to find someone who thinks they can "convert" them, because they can use this to their advantage.

On the other hand, I say some people over-demonize psychopaths though because they assume they're all on the extreme end of the spectrum and all with the same traits. For example, some autistic people can recognize facial expressions masterfully, but fail at other things. Similarly, not all psychopaths are alike or have the same motivations or methods.

If you read my post again, you'll note that I am admitting to the possibility that psychopaths can contribute positively to society, but only in as far as society arranges a cost/benefit system where positive contributions are rewarded more than negative ones.

However since there is really no scientific evidence a psychopath can truly change, you should not find it unsettling that we hold a non-scientific, subjective, anecdotal, and self-reported essay of change on the part of a psychopath with pessimism and doubt.
In my experience, the more you use currying, the more intuitive it becomes (surprise, surprise). In any case, you very quickly develop an understanding that `let foo bar baz = qux` is just syntactic sugar for `let foo = \bar -> \baz -> qux`. Of course, if you want to simulate higher-arity functions, you could just use tuples. It's perfectly acceptable to write `let foo(bar, baz) = qux`.
The irony of Daniel Bernstein chairing the IETF crypto review board is so potent that I got a small nosebleed just thinking about it. But, nomination emphatically seconded.

For what it's worth, Bernstein spends most of his time in Europe these days.
No, I don't have a study or anything, this is just personal experience.

> Other than the tiny percentage of fanatics who want to be martyrs, I don't consider religious folks to be an especially reckless bunch.

You see a more subtle form in the conservatism that goes with religion; many religions oppose positive social changes, and I think that's partly because of the assumption that nothing could be truly wrong with the world the way it is today.
This makes me curious. Will your $1000 limit increase stick, or be taken back?
Ho Ho Ho… Pay My Invoice
Grindr?
Docker hosting on dedicated infrastructure