skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He meant moving up in quality of life, not social status. It wasn't even implied, he said so rather specifically ("but really, that's beside the point.")

I'd much rather be lower class today than upper class in 1776. Comfort, medicine, availability of safe food, etc is all far better now for all classes than it was then for the upper class.

There's a big disparity, in some sense, between lower and upper classes in today's world, but the disparity doesn't show up in happiness or longevity so far as I know. Mostly it's about having nice things, or just wealth in general.
Yeah, I expected a response like this. I really shouldn't have implied that this tool isn't a programming tool, but I think there's a difference between this tool and some C library.
Those goods are all highly unique with no easy substitutes. One currency can buy something as easily as another.
One thing that people forget is that the $8 million system works as constant quality assurance. The $20 fan is all good but what if the weight of the boxes increases due to extra packaging? What about if the fan slowly dies over time?

The back up system will always make sure that only the correct boxes pass. I think people should realize that.
> no one has planted a bomb on a bus

What about the one that happened yesterday?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/killed-blast-s...
IMO you're coming at it from the wrong angle. i don't even own a tv at all. yet i compete in bodybuilding and go to the gym every day because i love it.

just because your idea of what is fun doesn't mesh with someone elses, doesn't mean it's stupid.

additionally, your n=1 example of eating whatever you want and not getting fat holds little statistical significant. when the average person consumes more calories and doesn't make up that increase in caloric intake with exercise, they will gain weight over time.
>But you're never going to get the same level of funding for robots that you'd get for a manned mission.

That's okay, there's plenty of other worthy things to spend government money on. If it's manned or bust, I'll take bust. Maybe a future generation won't be so childish.
Crypto Currency Questions and Answers
"X was quickly overtaken by Y" does not imply "X completely vanished."

Yes, a few notable apps are still 32-bit. But if you look at all Mac OS X programs in existence, a very healthy majority preferentially target the 64-bit platform. The 32-bit apps are the odd ducks, no matter how big a couple of those ducks have grown.
>Every decent puzzle game for instance is usually NP-hard.

An interesting question is how many of these puzzles are NP-hard in practice. For example, Minesweeper in NP-hard. However, it is possible to solve many games of Minesweeper using simple deductive reasoning in polynomial time. This leads to the question of what is the average difficulty of a random game. My best attempt at formalizing this question is to imagine reducing every game with a polynomial time algorithm, then look at the complexity of the remaining games. The complexity of an original game of size n could be the average after you reduce all games of size n with your polynomial time algorithm. If this new complexity is sub exponential than it feels as if there is some sense in which the game is not often NP-hard.

A more concrete example that comes to mind is Haskell's type inference. In general this type inference is NP-hard. However, there are algorithms that can solve it in polynomial time assuming a limit to nesting. Because no such limit actually exists, type inference is still exponential. But, because we never see arbitrarily deep nesting (except for contrived examples), this does not matter.
This is criticism. Focus on doing what you're doing. Let others work on and enjoy they're doing. There's no reason to call him out. Post something you've created here and I'm sure you'll find as much praise and encouragement.
Personally, I am downright shocked that Bitcoin is outpacing PayPal, which is a product that has more or less achieved market saturation.
Sensible post. Yes, doing crypto in the browser is generally harder due to not having direct access to OpenSSL and due to XSS and many other javascript-related vulnerabilities. But if you cover your ass, don't eval code willy-nilly, and package everything into a browser extension (not just your public key or 90% of your JS, but everything) you can mitigate a lot of potential threats. Also, don't try to reinvent SSL. If you do your own crypto in the browser, it should be for peer to peer, not peer to server.

With something like Firefox, you're kind of screwed. For instance, if I open firebug while using my Turtl extension, I can read the contents of memory right there...there's no real separation/sandboxing between extensions. If one extension can read the contents of another, you've got problems. Chrome does this better.

The best way is to package everything into a separate (os-level) app.
It was a company purchased ticket, I can probably dig it up...but by fees, I was lumping in surcharges, as you state.

One way my wife and I have helped deal with some of the line hassle -- GOES (for coming back into the country), Clear (had it before PreCheck came about and will reevaluate), and now PreCheck (GOES helped with this).

I've heard some mention that as more and more people become PreCheck eligible, that will become the norm rather than the exception. We shall see.

With regard to SFO not being TSA, I'm aware of this and generally have found them much more efficient than the TSA. Probably my best TSA experiences have been in Seattle (recently) and Kona, friendly and generally laughing. Worst opt out experience was actually SFO w/ a manager who took exception to anyone opting out and waited 10+ min before calling someone over -- "The delay is to encourage you to go through the machines".
I assume he/she was being facetious or sarcastic.
I grew up in the 70s. Back then, there was an entire generation that was smoking pot, although it was very recently deemed illegal.

It was a weird time. Most young people either smoked pot or knew somebody who did. There wasn't much odd about them, although we were told that smoking pot was terrible. On the street, however, it was fairly obvious that this was an overreaction. To hear some folks talk, there was little difference between heroin and pot. That was obviously not true.

It took 50 years for common sense to get back into the system, and even now, when the change is starting, it might be another 10 or 20 years to fully reverse pot laws. I'm not a pot user, but I find this slowness-to-adapt to common sense amazing.

Unfortunately, the system isn't just glacial in fixing bad laws -- it's fairly quick to add new bad laws as we go along. TSA is the case in point. Just like the pot laws, we're constantly told that there is a terrible danger out there that we need protection from, even though it's blatantly obvious that this is an overreaction and power grab. Nobody seems to be driving the bus.

So I guess we'll go through 50 years of increasing TSA "supervision" of travel until we see some kind of sanity? And how many TSAs will we have by then? It's depressing to think about.
Consider the new programmer, or the programmer new to python, or the corporation/workgroup new to python whose focus is not at all python as python but just GSD.

They read this, or you show it to them: Should I use Python 2 or Python 3 for my development activity? https://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3

It starts off very encouraging: "Short version: Python 2.x is legacy, Python 3.x is the present and future of the language"

Then we skim down to the meat of the page: Which version should I use?

Two short version stating that 3 is great, and you should use it. If you can.

And about 20 paragraphs of caveats.

To the person who's been around the block once or twice, or doesn't want to be seen as that pie in the sky programmer to his boss whose focus is not programming and doesn't give a shit about new, what stands out is "you can use virtually every resource available in 2, and almost mostly totally in 3 also."

And if you're new in any sense, do you really want to spend the time researching if 3 is going to work for you or your group/boss/career? No, you pick 2 and GSD.

When that page is gone, or its caveats are substantially reversed, 3 will be the choice.
I understand there are backwards incompatible changes in python 3.

But how hard is it to write code that works under both python 2 and python 3? Is this easy, or are the number and nature of changes so hard that this is a pain? How often do people write code that will work under both?

During the ruby 1.8 to 1.9 switch, it was common for people to write code that worked under both. How hard this was depended on the code base, but usually ranged from 'very easy' to 'medium but not that bad.'

You had to avoid the new features in 1.9.3 of course; you had to avoid a few features in 1.8.7 that had changed in backwards-incompat ways; and, mostly only around char encoding issues, you had to sometimes put in conditional code that would only run in 1.9.3. That last one was the most painful one, and overall it was sometimes a pain, but usually quite do-able, and many people did it.

Now, the ruby 1.8 to 1.9 migration was quite painful in many ways, but the fact that so many dependencies worked for a period in both 1.8 and 1.9, without requiring the developers to maintain two entirely separate codebases... is part of what made it do-able.

And, later, dependencies eventually dropping 1.8 support, of course, is part of what forced those downstream to go to 1.9.3. But by the time this happened, all of your major dependencies were probably available for 1.9.3, you rarely ran into the problem of "one dependency is only 1.8.7 but another is only 1.9.3", because of that period of many developers releasing gems that worked under both.
"AND the attacker and defender basically care the same about successful plane attacks vs train attacks,"

Can't hijack a train and knock down a skyscraper with it. At least not very well. Every once in a while a drunk or nutcase takes a train for a joyride (I come from a long line of railroadmen, I hear stories aside from whats in the paper). Most of them screw up the E-brake system but if its a former employee then the worst case is the switches get thrown to derail the engine before the lunatic hits anything. Its very expensive but not much of a big deal.
How The NSA Hacks Your iPhone (Presenting DROPOUT JEEP)
i like fast movement, i like communities that dare to break things every now and then (see semver.org for the widely accepted versioning rules and should be honoured).

much do i prefer an increasingly better solution to a stable one. i'm not agueing "perfect" over "good enough"; i'm argueing "awesome" over "good enough" :)
The core language hasn't changed very much at all in the last few months, it's mostly been libraries that have changed. I've been writing "Rust for Rubyists" for the past year, and I started with 0.5. I need smaller and smaller changes each time, and most of them are regex-able.
I don't think 1.0 is close, so we still have time to change the language. However, when the day does come, we'll have the guarantee.
notice the :)
I think that I must have misused false equivalency. My driving point is that implementing a hashing mechanism is in no way the same as TSA security theater, in theory or in practice. For instance, if 5 oz of liquid is dangerous on an airplane, why is it not dangerous in the trash can next to the security line?
While these apps are impressive for a 15 year old developer they are not really "high-quality" titles... yet MSFT allowed 30 of these games into the store by the same developer. If I were MSFT, I would've thrown a red flag up if not for QA, for potential spam.

Great work and keep it up, OP! I wouldn't worry about co-founders just yet. Keep hacking till you find something you are really passionate about and a co-founder will join you when and if the time is right (probably a t least 3 years down the road for legal reasons)
Producers do make money off the currency. Who will mine it if it's worth nothing?
And who will hold it if its value will collapse?
The tyrant can build a fortress to slaughter 99.999999% of attackers and be safe until a million men or more oppose him at once, but no stronghold can protect against death itself. And as long as he fears death, the fortress can be invaded in sufficient numbers through the personal physician's private entrance.

Besides that, if I and the tyrant were both immortal, I think I would still prefer to wait, at least until my odds of success were better.
Do we really need an article to explain why it's childish? It's face-slappingly, consumer-insultingly childish.
How about the shoe bomber or underpants bomber? Neither was successful, but neither would have required access to the cockpit either
Drones now have six American “test ranges” in which to fly
The year's top politicians and their best deletions from Twitter
Microsoft's Scroogled campaign is hilarious.

Crying about Microsoft's Scroogled campaign is childish.
A QR-code-beggar in NYC wanted to gather money for laptop upgrade
Did anyone really need convincing that the Scroogled campaign was childish? This campaign is so bad, it's going to be used in case studies for years to come.

We're literally looking at history in the making with this campaign. If MSFT declines in the coming years, this will be regarded as a signal of the beginning of the end. If they improve, this will be regarded as a "darkest before the dawn" moment. There are plenty of varying degrees of "bad," but "historical-record bad" is what Scroogled is.
I opt out of the body scanner every time but I find your mentality towards the TSA somewhat childish to be honest. I find it analogous to people who belittle and scream at fast food workers as if they're beneath them. You are not better than someone because they have a high school education.
Mostly hypocritical, however.

"Look at how Google is spying on you! Here at Microsoft, we totally don't do such shenanigans. I swear on me mum, mate!"
I never understood companies who spend millions in marketing to promote their software rather than spending that money on improving said software.

Why not just build great software that speaks for itself rather than try to manipulate your potential customers with high risks of backfire, as in this case.
No, it is not. How does a government funded org ever face bankruptcy, unless the government wants it to for political reasons? The NHS provides healthcare to the entire nation for about 7% of GDP. If there's any question of bankruptcy there are plenty of other areas to look at first.
One thing I've learned is that if you've found yourself ruffling feathers and receiving criticism for something that you've done that isn't objectively bad or immoral, you're probably on the right track.
Sorry it's Google translated.

Here's the link to the guy's website: http://mynameisroma.com/

He said he was able to get about $300 in three days.
> Every time I look at Rust, it still feels incredibly different from the last time I looked into it.

I think this is a good sign, as far as stabilization goes. It means they're frontloading all the experimentation, rather than saying "maybe next version."
According to their metrics, Bitcoin isn't just ahead in growth rate, it's ahead in the raw number of repositories. That is shocking to me.
We said this in the early days of Ember. Specifically, that while we were still making a lot of changes to Ember before 1.0, that we were going to go to strict SemVer compatibility post-1.0.

This made it clear to early adopters that things were rapidly changing, so you needed to be comfortable with that. It also helped people understand why there was so much breakage leading into 1.0, because it was in service of a much more stable post-1.0.

Since 1.0, we take Semver pretty seriously, and I think the strategy of being pretty unstable pre-1.0 in service of a very stable post-1.0 has paid off.
Could Dart or other languages in the browser solve this problem of not being able to do crypto properly in the browser, or is this a more fundamental problem of having crypto inside a browser in the first place?
I think it's just a restatement of policy that's already on the website.
Everything you said I assume is an assumption on your part. Nowhere have I said that the TSA is perfect, ideal, good, etc. I said that having the TSA is much preferable to having no screening measures whatsoever.

Nobody is claiming the TSA is ideal. Take a second to read the following comment - "If TSA is an ineffective means of instituting these safety precautions, then let's propose an alternative solution. Would be much more productive than endlessly harping about how much TSA sucks."

My main point is either propose a more effective solution or stop complaining. Because regardless of whatever your beliefs and protests are, complaining about the TSA will do nothing to get rid of them. And that is the main point, which can be generally applied to complaining about anything. Either fix [it] or live with [it]. You add nothing to the world by complaining about [it].
Well, to be honest, I'm not going to run around sacrificing myself for just anybody. And I'd definitely not just going to jump into such a thing without thinking there aren't any other options. And it'd only be a close loved one. A distant friend would be a tough call. A stranger? Probably not.

It seems almost borderline Sociopath to not love at least somebody that you'd be even willing to consider sacrificing yourself for. Have you ever been tested? (not trying to be insulting, genuinely curious)
Haskell and GHC: Too big to fail?
Soon fifteen is going to be an insufficiently low limit. Yes, slippery slope is generally a fallacy, but...it actually is happening. In Colorado, your "reasonable" magazine size limit is fifteen. In New York, it's ten in a pistol and five in a rifle, and you can only load seven rounds in the ten round magazine. California was a governor's veto away from banning all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines.

I also have yet to see a reason why these shouldn't apply equally to the police. If large capacity magazines only exist to kill people as quickly as possible, then why should the police have that? How many times are they going to encounter enough armed belligerents for the capacity to matter?
Mosh: remote shell that allows roaming
> it was actually later proven that Bing brings many of it results from Google's Search engine

This turned out to be a lie, right?
Misleading title - this doesn't prevent tampering, it just makes it obvious to you, as the laptop owner, that your machine has been tampered with. Still useful, but then what are you supposed to do about it?
If you really think that, giving it more attention isn't a great way to combat it. I'm sure they knew full well that there was going to be some negative reaction, but that the trade off for brand awareness (so much free coverage of their ad campaign) and introducing some level of doubt in some consumers' minds was worth it (see: negative political attack ads, Mark Penn, etc).

(and bringing up Bing copying Google's search results, and the ad campaign backfiring and somehow leading to chromebook sales isn't going to lend itself to a non-stupid HN discussion)
Look on the bright side: in this economy, many adults are getting divorced and moving back in with their parents. ;(
Github repositories and activity around them are more of a trend following phenomenon rather than future predictor.

Bitcoin by itself got all it's buzz first and the rest followed, including developer's activity.

PS: I personally own bitcoin repo on Github as well as on Wordpress.org plugin repository.
watching the video, at some points there seems to be audio lag...

I even wonder if the NSA actually tried to DDOS the skype call conference.
if you carry a cellphone, the government does know where you are at all times. this is now established fact.

why do you care so much more when the discussion is around guns?
I'm curious what specific issue Apple has with GPLv3 for something like bash? It seems to me that if they're providing the source, and not modifying the copyright/license, there would be no issue. The patent language only applies to the program itself. I guess one could view it as simple paranoia on the part of their lawyers...they took years to start shipping any GPL (v2) code on the Mac. It's actually news to me that it has bash out of the box, now; last time I used Mac OS X, it still had tcsh and an abominable development environment and I hated it.
> it was actually later proven that Bing brings many of its results from Google's search engine

What's he talking about? Making this claim without a cite is annoying. Making copy-and-paste not work so I couldn't even copy and paste it here is even more annoying.
was it just me, or were the comments on that story unreadable until highlighted?
2010 Stanford study. I updated my post.
i feel ruby's syntax is mostly done. an addition here or there, but breaking shall be rare as it just feels so finished. performance wise i think it can use (and gets) a lot of love.

on the python side things are different. python seems quite a bit faster then ruby. same league, but faster. yet its syntax is what needs to be greatly improved upon as it is so full of surprises and dark corners.

a language's syntax it's like its API, and performance is an implementation "detail". breaking the API is much more painful then chaning the implementation -- therefor i prefer ruby's approach: begin slow but with a quite stable syntax.

p.s. i dont intend to hurt feelings with this comment
Bikes are stolen using battery powered angle grinders.

And those locks don't need to be as compact as something securing some fragile electronics to a gun. And guns can actually be worth something.
I would like to see some of your work that is 100% yours and no libraries or anything else.
There are plenty. Mainly, every machine has an expiration date.

Re-hash of old argument, addressed by SENS.

http://www.ted.com/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_ag...

not everything can be 'micro-fixed'

There are only 7 distinct forms of aging-related damage. The only one that doesn't have a sensible and straightforward strategy for fixing is cancer.
I don't, and I never made that claim because it's insane. I object to the idea that "feminist activists" "didn't push to get more women into tech until tech was a higher paying, lower risk endeavor."

There's a claim "women are more risk averse", and another claim "feminist activists exist", both of which are feasibly true, that do not lead to general conclusion that "feminist activists did not push to get more women into tech until it was a higher paying, lower risk endeavor". Which is a broad, unsupported argument, for which the data directly contradicts:

http://blogs.computerworld.com/it-careers/21993/women-comput...
The NHS is not set up to make money, it is set up to spend it. You appear to think it is some kind of profit making enterprise - it is a way of spending taxpayers money to safeguard their health, and does so in a demonstrably more efficient manner than private healthcare systems based on insurance, despite any flaws it may have. Compare costs with the US for example.

Clearly it will never turn a profit in pounds and pence, only in lives saved. Talking of bankruptcy in that context is a nonsense introduced by politicians intent on doing away with it for ideological reasons.
You are informed that the machine is not to be trusted. From then on proceed depending on how secure your data is.
http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/microsofts-bing-use...