skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Alan Kay recommended it. He kept bringing it up. I finally read it last week. It's awesome. I think you can apply what people did with the TV to how people use social media: a series of interruptions.

Someone posted the pdf of the 20th anniv. edition. Google: Amusing Ourselves to Death pdf
It should be pointed out that these are active speakers with a builtin USB DAC. There are a variety of these things out there at this price range atm and they sound surprisingly good. Recommended.

Alternatives:

http://www.thomann.de/gb/alesis_m1_active_320_usb.htm

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/StuDock3i/?adpos=1t1

(There's a decent chance all 3 are the same product rebranded tbh.)
Thank you for this. Since I responded to a similar thread a week or so ago I have been looking up the details on 3840 v 4096. Not so easy to find a centralized description of the evolution of the term "4k".
> From what I've seen, bookmarks are not "branches" in any sense, really just pointers to commits.

That's exactly what git branches are.
Facebook considers itself malicious
I only read a summary / excerpt / essay (don't which it was exactly and if it was from the book or another text by Postman on the same subject) quite some time ago.

His premise basically is that humans are increasingly becoming incapable of doing meaningful stuff or having meaningful conversations while gladly frittering away time for meaningless bullshit provided by the media.

While the dominant theme in his book naturally is TV the connection to today's social media usage and news consumption is quite obvious.

However, while the subject is important I'm not sure you need to read the entire book for the message to sink in.
Hello!, I might be interested in the security operation manager position. (I'm from Spain, relocation might be fine for me, but remote is preferred).
Reminds me of the SQL injection attack licence plate: http://gizmodo.com/5498412/sql-injection-license-plate-hopes...
What occurred to me is that as more conditions are added to the question the answer seems to tend toward the naive assumption of 1/2 (in his explanation 0.25, 0.33, 0.42, 0.48). This is like a strange cross-over between word problems, probability and unbelievably calculus. Essentially:

lim[generic -> specific] f(P("is one child of two a boy")) = 1/2

Obviously I have no proof for it but it is an interesting observation.
After enumerating all the options and their respective probabilities, yes, you discard all those that are inconsistent with the information to hand.

You bring up the Monty Hall problem. The options there are:

[ c ] [ g ] [ g ]
[ g ] [ c ] [ g ]
[ g ] [ g ] [ c ]

These are all equally likely.

Then you choose a door. Let's assume you choose door 1. To keep things equally likely, let's suppose Monty flips a coin. Heads he opens the left-most unchosen door that doesn't reveal a car, Tails he opens the right-most. Now we have six options:

Heads:
[ c ] [ g*] [ g ]
[ g ] [ c ] [ g*]
[ g ] [ g*] [ c ]

Tails:
[ c ] [ g ] [ g*]
[ g ] [ c ] [ g*]
[ g ] [ g*] [ c ]

As you can see, there are now 6 equi-probable choices, and in 4 of them it's better to switch.

A: So now let's take another experiment. I tell you I'm going to flip two coins until at least one of them is heads. I do that. Now I ask you to bet on whether or not there is a tail. What do you think are fair odds?

B: Now I hunt among couples with two children until I find one that doesn't have two girls, and I ask: what are the odds they have two boys?

C: Finally, I hunt among couples with two children until I find one that has at least one boy, and I ask: what are the odds they have two boys?

This last is how the question is usually interpreted.

There are three options.

1: Your answers to A, B, and C are not all the same;

2: They are all the same, and not 1/3;

3: They are all the same, and all 1/3.

If your answers to A, B and C are not all the same, I'd like to know why. If they are not all 1/3, I'd like to play game A with you. If your answer to C is 1/3, then you've agreed with the usually interpretation and contradicted yourself.
I'm fairly sure that @swombat is referring to Postman's book, not Huxley's.
As a Brit, I thought the entire point of the FBI was to tackle crimes that individual states couldn't due to jurisdiction not crossing state lines (nor should it). Sort of like Interpol within one country. So who does that now?
Killing people is not the same as torture, and is not serving the same purpose.

The Firefly gang fight and kill all the time, the first episode forces a pacifist (Book) to confront his objections to violence in a nontrivial moral situation. What they don't do routinely as a tactic is torture people.

A better counterexample would be Jayne and the fed: "Damn, and I was gonna get me a ear, too..."
This is a description which makes no sense whatsoever, given git and mercurial are both DVCS there's no "client" or "server".

1. Mercurial branches are commit metadata, the branch name lives in the commit. Git branches are pointers to a commit (which move when a new commit is added on top of the existing branch commit), living outside the commit objects.

2. As a separate concern, Git has multiple branch namespaces ("remote" versus "local" branches, where each remote generates a branch namespace, and remote-tracking local branches). Mercurial only has a single namespace.
Semantic Spider: Enabling 'Semantic Web Technology' for Chrome
Not only that, but they recently just canceled out my outstanding balance of $0.85 when I asked if it was possible to only pay them what I owed, instead of a full $5. That wasn't even surprising, considering the way they've been operating.
No, that's completely different logic.

You can pay for something with euros in the US as long as they accept it, even if after all they do is go to the bank and convert to USD.
> torture is portrayed

I think the root of the problem is more about torture being portrayed at all.

Even if you portray it a the evilest thing, you are still playing with the spectator's bowels and disgust thresholds in ways that cannot bring anything good.

There is room for torture depiction is some niche genres, like horror or sadism (e.g. Salo) but I can't understand how it should come to mainstream media as TV series and take such a big room.

Just like sex and pron: it is ok, but please let it be marginal.
> bazaar expects you to have a separate working copy (directory) for each branch, but you can have multiple branches stored in the same repository without any problem

Shared repositories didn't originally exist and IIRC were added to avoid data duplication. Furthermore, they don't fix the multiple working copies problem (you have to use lightweight checkouts or collocated branches for that).
Yes, Mercurial is looking quite healthy—Facebook details why Git doesn't work for them and all of the improvements they've made to Mercurial for their repo which is several times the size of the Linux kernel: https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-merc...
I've got two U2713HM. One at work, connected to a Mac Mini (HD4000) via displayport. The other at home using HDMI (so not up to full native res). The only problems have been caused by the Mac Mini (and have happened no matter what the connection being used was). We're also using it to connect a few other large monitors to various Macs.

I don't think your problem is anything to do with displayport. In fact, I'd recommend using it to anyone connecting a large non-Apple monitor to anything with a miniDP or DP connector to drive it. Shame that miniDP to DP cables are so hard to get hold of (down here in NZ, at least).

Edit: I'm running Linux, most of the others are on OS X. As I said, only problems have been the Mac Mini's fault (happens with all connectors and OSes).
Well, there are only five reasonable ways to disagree.

(1) Do you hold that concepts and principles are purely "in" the referents?

(2) Do you hold that they are purely "in" man's mind?

(3) Do you hold that they are "in" man's mind, but refer to properties of the referents? (Rand's conclusion)

(4) Do you hold that Rand's argument and conclusion is correct, but somebody else made it earlier?

(5) Do you hold that there is insufficient evidence to answer the question (which then raises questions about why you would even engage in an intellectual discussion)? For example, you could "argue" for a subjectivist view of knowledge.

An actual answer along the lines of 1-5 would be useful, but stating "I don't think so" does not provide any reasoning, and thus is utterly devoid of intellectual content.

You seem to be dismissing a theory without considering and responding to its evidence, which is fraudulent science. Nobody wants to see that kind of "argument," even people who nonetheless do agree with the conclusion.

I do think you have the intellectual right to merely state that you disagree, but you have to say that you don't intend to defend it, or let yourself be subject to having it pointed out by someone, as I am.

That is because too many people today hide behind the assumption that agreement or disagreement without evidence presented is enough to establish or disestablish truth. As I said before, that is fraudulent science.
"Consider this question. A chap flips a coin in the morning and thereby chooses one of his two children. Today he will only talk about that child. Later I meet him and he talks about his son. I thereby deduce that he has at least one boy. What are the chances he has two children?
Answer: 1/2."

Do you mean "what are the chances he has two sons, not children?

By the way, thanks for your input on this thread, I'm sure I speak for many in saying that I really appreciate it!
With hetzner you find it nice until your first hardware failure occurs, which could take 3 days to get solved, then you come back to a VPS provider where you can destroy/create instances in a heartbeat. If you run a low traffic/profitless blog hetzner & co might be fine for you, for mission critical stuff I want flexibility.
As mentioned in other replies, it's clear now that you are interpreting the question in a manner other than the usual interpretation, and then being incredibly rude about anyone who disagrees with you.

I have in my hand a device that lets me call up on demand most of the knowledge of the world, and I use it to look at pictures of cats, and to argue with strangers.

Deleting the second option ...
TL;DR do not look for fancy names like "4k" and "UHD", just check the tech specs by yourself.

Spotted a mistake: when explaining that "4k" designates a resolution of 4096×2160, they incorrectly label 4096 as the "vertical resolution".
The guide from [1] confirms it works the way I saw it (it pushes all branches):

Mercurial will push/pull all branches by default, while git will push/pull only the current branch.

Did this behavior change in recent versions of hg?

1 - http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-me...
What's sad is that the original author of the comic was forced to take it down due to request from Estate of Neil Postman's. You'd think their estate would want his ideas spread.
Guess you need to tell Facebook and their repo that "many times larger than the Linux kernel" to grow up, because they're using Mercurial and have made lots of improvements to it: https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-merc...
> Do you mean ... "sons," not "children"?

Yes - thank you - edited to reduce confusion.

And thanks for the kind comment.
No. In person I can see what the other party is thinking.

The two are independent variables, man. I don't know how to explain it any more clearly than that. What's tripping people up is the idea that removing GG from the possibilities doesn't affect the local probability of either particular child being girl. It does. You must reformulate. THAT's the counterintuitive part. It's just hella hard to explain, because there are too many 2's and 1/2's floating around the problem, so when you say one cancels another, people think you're not incorporating the first to begin with, so you must be one of the dolts the author is trying to learn some knowledge.

The following, you can take or leave: probability is my thing. I got Monty Hall right when I was in 6th grade. I was an AIME invitee, if you know what that is. I got 800 on the math SAT; 36 on the math ACT in freshman year. None of these things mean anything, logically speaking, I know. I say them only to encourage you (and only you, because you're putting in effort) to consider what I'm saying as fully as you're considering what the crowd is saying.
Yes, Mercurial is being actively developed; Facebook has a great post about why Mercurial and not Git with data: https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-merc...
Actually, those of us born around the time the USSR collapsed are more in favor of public institutions: we've seen what happens in their absence.
do you have a source on this? For me laziness is the single strongest thing going for Haskell.
Coconut oil is definitely bad for you[1].
You are better of consuming other oils like Olive, sunflower and even ground nut.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coconut_oil#Health
I think it's probably good to be precise in this case. It should state that "at least one child is a boy born on a Tuesday, but one is older than the other by at least a day".
> ultimate driving force behind both authoritarianism and consumerism that continues to rule the world, money and capitalism

I would say the problem is any social structure that allows money to buy power, i.e. that allows the translation of economic power into political power (and vice versa). Either we should prevent that, or consider placing a cap on maximum per-capita economic power (preferably as a factor of the average, not unlike the Swiss proposal for CEO salaries).

A person should be able to buy as many yachts, castles or private jets as he wants, but using his money to lobby, campaign or otherwise influence political process -- perhaps that should be severely limited?

Civilization and technology today allows individual human beings to wield far higher concentrations of power than our psychology evolved to deal with. A good social system should cap it below the threshold where people go crazy (i.e. where our brains malfunction).
Lobbyists was supposed to be experts in the field of whatever subject they are helping the politicians with. In practice they are experts in lobbying, nothing else. The salary comes from a company that has a certain interest and pays the lobbying organisation to get this result through the politicians. The bribery is not actually exchanging with the politician, it's with the lobying organisation. Bribery would have been more understanding, here it's just a question of stupidity sadly. The lobbying groups are confusedly just taking the money and wondering why it's so easy. There are a few documentaries on this subject and all the lobbyists are talking openly about what they do. The politicians not so.
> No. In person I can see what the other party is thinking.

So when you have less knowledge about the other person you are more rude. I feel that's logically inconsistent.

> The two are independent variables, man. I don't know
> how to explain it any more clearly than that.

"The two" ?? What "two"? Your "explanations" are very unclear.

> What's tripping people up is the idea that removing GG
> from the possibilities doesn't affect the local probability
> of either particular child being girl. It does. You must
> reformulate.

Again, it's clear that you are talking about a different problem. Yes, the problem you are talking about has an answer of 1/2. No, it's not the problem we're talking about.

> It's just hella hard to explain, ...

You will find many things difficult if you don't learn how to slow down, take time, be precise, and explain clearly. Be more like Feynman - take time to explain things clearly and precisely.

> ... you must be one of the dolts ...

Ah.

> The following, you can take or leave: probability is my
> thing. I got Monty Hall right when I was in 6th grade.
> I was an AIME invitee, if you know what that is. I got
> 800 on the math SAT; 36 on the math ACT in freshman year.

Good for you. I speak for and contribute to the training of IOM teams, I've been an invited speaker at the Museum of Mathematics in New York, the Dutch National Mathematics days, Matematikbiennalen in Sweden, and more math masterclasses than I can count. This year I'm speaking in London, Switzerland, Belgium, and giving around 150 talks, masterclasses, and workshops. I have a Bachelors, Masters, and PhD.

> None of these things mean anything, logically speaking,

Right.

> I know. I say them only to encourage you (and only you,
> because you're putting in effort) to consider what I'm
> saying as fully as you're considering what the crowd is
> saying.

Hmm. Well, thanks for the encouragement. I was only saying these things to point out that I have considered these things, and have some form in the area. I forgot to mention that I was at the G4G when the Tuesday Boy problem was first mentioned, and spent much of the evening with Tanya Khovanova, Gary Foshee, John Conway, Richard Guy, and others, talking about the various interpretations. I didn't talk about it with Martin Gardner when I spent an afternoon with him, we were talking about my work.

I mention these things only to point out that you might consider that you are wrong.

So, do you answer 1/3 for each of A, B, and C?
Well, if that true, I'd prefer to investigate and make them fast, instead of using "bookmark-as-a-branch" because of all the cool stuff mercurial branches have (like great log-drawing with branch info).
I've considered building something alongside these lines before. Imagine a minimal Google-esque homepage or app....

Where can I get _________ in __________ ?

With questions recently asked near your geolocation shown below. Maybe you could follow people, or locations.
The article stated you would be working in the area you wish to work in, so if you are a developer you will most likely be working on WordPress or something relating to it (I may be wrong, just a presumption).

Considering that Wordpress is open source and any candidate applying at Automattic as a developer will most likely be familiar or know of it, the chance of having a developer not being familiar with it in one way or another are slim, even more so if it's someone actually wanting the job.

If I was looking to be hired by a company working with open source, I would most definitely do my homework up fornt and familiarize my self with their "flagship product" as it were.
This implies that HTTPS would easily bypass it.

If only the Guardian had HTTPS support...
I concur. Not only is the sound surprisingly good for the price, but they look pretty cool too.
Why I Like Writing
What do you mean by "git model"? Creating branch per feature? But that's exactly what I do in mercurial!
The difference between a NULL entry and a sentinel value. And poorly designed systems.

Anyone with a correct understanding of the problem domain would know you have to cope with missing plates by indicating they are missing and not by using (many) different sentinel values. The fact each city/county/state uses a different value indicates the whole ticket processing system is a screwed up mess.

The North American system of plates essentially identifying a person and not a vehicle is weird. The UK still allows vanity plates but they are bound to the vehicle (and to a current keeper - when you sell it the plates go with the vehicle to the new keeper unless you make special arrangements). I still find it odd to take the plates off a vehicle being sold and to have to get them put on to the new one.

A vehicle without plates in violation of traffic/parking laws should be towed (or in some places it could be blown up as a security threat - Northern Ireland that used to be a regular event and a joy-riders post-drive fun to remove the plates and wait for the fireworks).

At least if it is towed, the fines can be sorted out before the return of the vehicle rather than wasting time (and money) on a no-hope chase of some unidentifiable owner unless some schmuck happens to have a vanity plate matching your chosen sentinel value [in which case you then have the extra expense of wasting time cancelling the ticket or even wasting court time before it gets dismissed].
Why not tone down even more to get to the fact that not only can they both abuse their power, but they can both not do so too. Not all politicians and corporations are created equal.
Seems very difficult to at the very least have a set of restricted words reserved for special purposes
The definition of artificial (implying it being negative or immoral) is what makes no sense. Everything about all of that is always artificial. All the rules are artificial. The distinction between artificial and not artificial cannot determine whether this is ok or not.
Well, mercurial branch is just a record in list of branches, so is it then also "conceptually lightweight"? What is "conceptually lightweight" anyway?
Yes, by default all branches are pushed, (you would have to use --force if it creates new heads, and --new-branch to push new named branches). But I really don't see how it makes anything "server" or "client" side.

(and you could in any case decide to push just default: hg push -r default)
The $700 monitor they are talking about is not an UltraSharp, but a P-series monitor. In the past the P-series label has used for both TN and cheaper IPS panels. Dell already has a couple of 4K UltraSharp monitors, but they cost a lot more.
If you like your depressing stories in musical form, try listening to 'Amused to Death' by Roger Waters, inspired by the book. Great album.

If you want to amuse yourself while listening, make sure you have your speakers set up so the stereo effect on the barking dog at the start sounds like it's coming from outside. Also make sure your system can cope with the sound of the bomb dropping.
What the fuck? Yeah, gamers and their laser-brains. Where everything is always illegal and you are entitled to everything. And refunds, refunds, refunds.
Why is mercurial branches ineffective to move around branches? If I'm not mistaken, if you want to move commits from one branch to another you do absolutely the same rebase.
Try getting it through customs without paying ~$1000 customs duty.

If it can't fit in my carry on, it is very difficult to just ship to China.
> Do you use both the internal display and external monitor?

Yes

> Have you tried connecting more than one external monitor?

Never tried. This laptop has only one mini DisplayPort output. I heard that there are splitter cables/adapters which should allow for that but I haven't found an affordable one yet. An alternative would be a display that supports daisy chaining (the only one which I am aware of is Apple's Thunderbolt display which doesn't even turn on for me).
I also thought the original article was better, and clearer. As you say—it's the hidden assumptions which are interesting.

In maths exams at school the problems are always presented in the form of: "a random family was chosen from ...". (Similar to "a smooth cube is resting on a smooth surface".

In real life, it's more difficult. The original article looks at real life, whereas the 300-word version has reduced it to the exam version. Of course it's "easier" to understand the exam version, but this wasn't the point.
It's not just you, it looks horrible here as well. The font "chaparral-pro-display" seems poorly hinted (at least on my firefox) and has hideous geometry (big blobs / spots on letters like 'r' and 'u' for example).

http://i.imgur.com/8pNNrdu.png
I know nothing about Australia, but $699 plus 20% is $838.80, which is $940 in AUD, which is under $1k.
Well, to be fair, you still have only "heard about it somewhere", and still don't "have any proof of it" (unless you really trust the parent commenter, and I see the account was created 3 days ago).

Not saying you should trust Linode, but that your confidence in thar rumour probably shouldn't have improved after the parent comment.
Ewwwww… Spitzer Caught Sucking Topless Mistress’ Toes At Family Resort