skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It'd be nice to see a solution to this problem for Hulu. It seems like they accomplish this already by failing to load ads. On my Wii there's a good chance that ads won't load and it forces me to go back to the menu or hit 'retry'. At first it was annoying but now I've come to rely on ads failing so that I don't skip too many episodes after falling asleep. Though you probably can't get me to wear something that monitors my vitals.
Ahahaha. That's all I have to say, because your point is so pedantic and wrong, that your aspergers might have infected your whole frontal cortex.
First Ever Scientific Journal Article (1665)
You're using your camera's flash wrong [David Pogue]
Hah! Of course an Emacs calculator would contain a rudimentary CAS. How couldn't it?
But what do you with existing holdings? Do you "lock" them so the employee is prohibited from dumping/purchasing them in the event of insider information?
I think we should start a new line of thought in the development community - linux first. :(
There is monumental material on this in sites like Perlmonks.

I started writing a detailed reply, but half way down I realized it might become a booklet project[Which is a very good project idea by the way]

I also realized I may not be able to justice to 3 decades of Perl history in one HN comment.

So the best I can do is point you out to two links.

http://hop.perl.plover.com/ and http://onyxneon.com/books/modern_perl/
wow - 1st world problems :) It doesn't say much for the things people are watching if they are falling asleep watching them. Maybe a night or two without tv would be a good idea.
Uh, look up the thread. You're replying to a post predicated on someone else's rejection of blind trusts.
Free spam protection up 10 users, technology protecting millions
Terminal-dict – Look up words in your terminal
Find me where I said proof.

There are all kinds of things that we cannot prove, because it is either impossible or wildly unethical to conduct a randomized study. For those things, you can make a determined effort to control for as many "third factors" - the technical term for them is confounders - and that gives you a level of evidence which is well above guessing.

Since I can't reply to your comment, my responses here:

> "You didn't say proof but you said it's better than guessing, and I don't agree with you at all."

It is better than guessing. You're welcome to disagree, but a well conducted observational study is considerably firmer evidence than pulling it from your posterior.

> "What if there is a correlation between Vegetarian-lifestyle and Serial-killers ? Does it tell you that it's better than guessing ? Do you even question if the association/correlation makes remote sense ? Is there any underlying mechanism of action that would remotely explain rationally why this correlation could be linked to any real causation phenomenon ?"

All you've done is describe a really bad study. You can have really bad RCTs as well, by the way.

Of course you question whether or not an observed association has a clear biological or social mechanism. And you attempt to control for other variables that might influence the link between your exposure and your outcome. You run followup studies in different populations to try to understand if the result is a widespread phenomena, or a fleeting bit of statistical noise.

Basically, you do your job well. Which is why I used phrases like "a good first step".

Your example is about as useful as "Programming is useless because once I coded something poorly and corrupted my data".
I feel like on any given day I could fall into any one of those two camps.
Pretty please me as well :)
To start with, Functor gives an generic interface (fmap) allowing you to take

Foo<A>

and a function

B f(A)

and apply it to get

Foo<B>

Then monad gives us something called join, which lets us take:

Foo<Foo<A>>

and turn it into

Foo<A>

It's pretty obvious that a Vector of Vectors of A's can be turned into a Vector of A's by concatenating them into one Vector. Also optional (something I don't know much about, sorry) can be turned from Optional<Optional<A>> into Optional<A> if the outer actually contains an inner optional, and the inner optional contains an A.

So with these two things, we can do things like:

Vector<B> f(A);
Vector<C> g(B)

Vector<A> foos = {a,b,c};

foos.fmap(f).join().fmap(g).join()

to get a Vector<C>. The result is basically considered all possible results of applying f to all the values in foos, and then applying g to all the values returned by all the calls to f. this is the non-deteminism monad, where each function f and g can produce multiple results (including none) for each input, and we can chain multiple non-deterministic computations to get all the non-deterministic results.

Usually Mopnad is explained with return and bind, but I think it's a bit less obvious. But I'll give it a shot...

bind in Haskell is something that takes something of type

Foo<A>

and a function with type

Foo<B> f(A)

and produces something of type

Foo<B>

From above, we can rewrite the example with

Vector<B> f(A)
Vector<C> g(B>
Vector<A> foos = {a,b,c};

foos.bind(f).bind(g);

and get the same result as before. I guess you could use slightly cleaner syntax (why the hell not overload >> for yet another bizarre use right? [leading to foos >> f >> g;])

I hope that you can see that this is just a simple interface which can work for many types that look like Foo<a> (Vector, Set [assuming C++ has that?], Optional, even pointers to some extent; see the discussions of the introduction of "?." into C# which is exactly what the Maybe monad encodes). There are also plenty of other monads in the haskell universe which aren't as easy to show in C++ because a) I'm not sure C++'s type system is up to it and b) my C++ knowledge is not strong enough to demonstrate things like the State monad, and definitely the Cont[inuation] monad.

Anyway, bring it back to the topic of the article, it should be clear that something of type

Future<A>

can be composed with other functions w3hich produce more Futures:

Future<B> f(A);
Future<C> g(B);

Future<A> async_A("thing");

asyc_A.bind(f).bind(g);

Which handles all the unwrap and passing of values "inside" the future to each consecutive function.

I know this isn't a concise explanation, but it's because it's a very simple, but also very abstract idea, and its best introduced with example uses, then generalising it.
"Making good on a trade" is not the goal of a rational investor. The goal is increasing one's wealth. An SEC employee divested of an asset has no greater interest in the asset being devalued merely because ey once held the asset.
Medical and public health researchers are bound to ethical guidelines that would prevent something like this, because the preponderance of evidence is that having health insurance is a net positive for someone's health - the only reason it made sense in Oregon is the fact that they needed a lottery anyway.

As for the Oregon study, the results of that study are still relatively new (the idea that any measure focused on preventative health will show results after two years is pretty suspect). The authors of the study discuss this for diabetes:

"Medicaid significantly increased the probability of being diagnosed with diabetes after the lottery (by 3.8 percentage points, relative to a base rate of 1.1) and use of diabetes medication (by 5.4 percentage points, relative to a base rate of 6.4). As discussed in the paper, based on clinical trial evidence on diabetes medication, we would expect this increase in the use of medication for diabetes to decrease the average glycated hemoglobin level in the study population by 0.05 percentage points, which is well within our 95% confidence interval for the impact of Medicaid on the level of glycated hemoglobin."
Click and read. It's for password fields only.

> PSA: Ignoring autocomplete='off' by default for password fields
Ask HN: Will famo.us survive native browser optimizations?
Will the gap between famo.us' calculate-the-CSS-transform-and-apply-directly-to-the-element in order to circumvent the browser's native ability be a viable option once the browsers themselves optimize their engines? WILL they optimize their engines? Am I understanding the value of famo.us correctly?
I've always enjoyed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDpYBT0XyvA&feature=kp
They don't do that
How about a blind trust of index funds? Those blind trusts aren't always blind.
Best online tool to keep personal confidential document
Since every work is been gone online , right from banking to simple shopping, it is tough to maintain every such details in your personal computer/pen drive, restricting to use only when it is available. Hence if there is any better tool online. Other than google doc, dropbox etc, which offer multiple level of security, so even if some one get the information, it gonna be encrypted.
Why would your second point be a bad consequence? If the ACA doesn't work and we repeal it, isn't that a good thing?
Same here please. SyncTheory13 at the above domain.
In addition to what nbouscal pointed out, I'd just like to say that I very explicitly did not assume it worked just because it compiled. The last code block doesn't just have the miniature library, it also contains code that uses it, and that code works perfectly. That's the opposite of assuming that because it compiles, it works.

Though the only way for something with those types to not work when it compiles would be for it to crash or go into an infinite loop. I didn't use any constructs capable of either of those, so it was very unlikely for it to fail once it compiled.
That's not really true. A C++ compiler will verify that an instantiated template type checks. What concepts gives you is better error messages, overloading, and I presume it allows type checking of uninstantiated templates.
It is very inconvenient on a large page like this, should you need to quickly move up/down to read a related comment. If you know it, dragging the scrollbar, on the other hand, is quick to land you in the approximate target region.
Verizon CEO is dying to charge you more for Netflix
Isn't that a bit extreme? I'm not saying there should be implicit trust or that there is no risk of insider trading, but still. Its not right to deny them of all rights to have other sources of income apart from their job. I mean, having to sell all their stocks of a certain company before investigation is forfeiture enough.

My two cents,

D: Some sort of anonymized peer review of transactions? Maybe even automated.
I'm pretty damn sure I've got one foot in each camp.
While I can't get too upset at CNN for not having a typography expert on speed dial, that slideshow is honestly pretty terrible.

- American Airlines famously used Helvetica for decades, but the 2013 rebrand (shown in the picture) uses a newer humanist sans family.

- Evian's logotype shares some of Helvetica's proportions, but it's clearly a different type family (the terminals on the 'e' and 'a' are totally different), possibly a highly customized Frutiger.

- Staples does use Helvetica, but that sign doesn't! I'm not sure if that's from some aborted redesign, cut-rate sign contractor, or what, but compare the size of the counters (open spaces) on both the A and the P: http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/01/02/business/ADCO/ADCO...

- It looks like Skype is using Helvetica Rounded, which is fair (it was added over 20 years after the original Helvetica family), but it's worth pointing that out instead of having an unrelated caption.
SEC employees should be able to sell at any time after review by their supervisor and a compliance officer - this would treat the employees no differently than the securities employees they regulate. I also agree with mandatory divestment prior to an expected conflict of interest.

To incentivise against insider trading: anonymous public disclosure of all un-forced stock sales by SEC employees. This would expose suspicious trades ex post facto. In the event of prosecution or investor lawsuits (a) the name of the employee would be unsealed during discovery and (b) the SEC, the employee, and the supervisor and compliance officer who approved the trade(s) would jointly share civil and criminal liability.
Jobs and Wozniak don't match this discussion very well: Woz was responsible for both the idea and the implementation, to first order. It's true that without Jobs there wouldn't have been a company.
There's only one formulation of Moore's Law - the one from 1965 paper. Clock speed has nothing to do with it.

Clock speed is generally not a good indicator of a processor performance. I'm guessing a single 2GHz Haswell core is faster than 4GHz P4, due to a number of significant architectural improvements, which were made possible by the larger number of transistors available.

Keep in mind that processor performance per watt continues to improve significantly every two years, with no sign of slowing down in the nearest future.
Why is this a first world problem? Netflix (or streaming Internet television) may not be available in every country, but you'd be hard pressed to find a place where people don't have easy access to some form of Television. Is it not interesting that there's a hack that someone might adapt to regular television (and probably save power) some day?

In any case, just because people are doing interesting things that may be relevant only in the first world doesn't make them any less interesting. This is after all, Hacker News, not Solve-Only-Global-Problems News.
That's an opinion, not fact.
What's the point of programming in a language that has 100 ways to do something, and then banning all but 99 of them?

Because the real world comes with edge cases. Just because 99 times out of 100 you're better off with the agreed upon standard, doesn't mean that other way doesn't have it's distinct time and place that it can shine, and clearer, cleaner and or faster. I would much rather be constrained by convention than by capability.

no single object framework

No, but the reason for that's been a good one historically (experiment and see what comes out on top). That ended up being Moose and it's ilk (Moo, Mouse). I can't think of a single case I've heard about where people used something else and it wasn't driven by some external factor.

References are confusing and unnecessary

I've always liked references. It seems to make clear exactly what's going on. Maybe it's just me.
Stack overflow Statistics
Why Boeing? Why not Motorola? It would seem to come more naturally to Moto; I mean if they built jetliners there would have been no reason to invent the phrase "jet lag".
They should call it tailings pile coin instead because it's been premined so badly.
Why are software dev task estimations off by factor of 2-3?
What's really great about Helvetica is that it's idiot-proof on a wide variety of browsers, and given my limited web-design experience that puts Helvetica in the "Swiss" category of robust design.

I personally prefer a more evenly kerned quasi-typewriter font like Inconsolata, but it takes a lot of work to get it looking right on all browsers.
By this logic, it would be unethical for the FDA to demand a random trial for any drug that has some correlation studies showing it is effective.

As for the number you are cherrypicking, it is true that health insurance increased medical consumption (including ER visits, in spite of what ACA supports claimed) among people who received it. However, no measurable effect on health (besides depression) was observed.
sheeple... we won't change shit by talking shit on here.
Google Pays For The Ride
> References are confusing and unnecessary (neither Python nor Ruby needed to make an artifical distinction between references and non-references).

Perl references combined with its nested list semantics make it extremely convenient to flatten arrays and hashes when you need to. Doing the equivalent in Python and Ruby is verbose and ugly by comparison. I know in Ruby you can get it down to one line, but it lacks the cleanliness of Perl (if you can believe that).
Google didn't really have a culture of testing until around 2005-2006. At that point they were public and had a $100B+ market cap. I'm sure there are other public companies out there who don't do automated testing at all.

The technical infrastructure and code quality of a company are secondary factors in its success. The biggest influence they have is in the ability to attract and retain brilliant engineers, because most brilliant engineers don't want to work in a place where they're just treading water with bugfixes (which is the situation you eventually get into without automated testing). But the mechanism is that brilliant engineers write features that your competitors can't match, not that testing itself will make you successful.
You're right, why use precise language to describe abstract concepts when we could just communicate knowledge using longform metaphors and cryptic analogies. Or maybe we could just grunt at each other like animals.
Gmail Tap – bit too popular
Crate & Barrel definitely does use Helvetica, but their logo has one of the more... idiosyncratic alternates in the history of its use. That geometrically circular 'C' has always irked me, but it wouldn't be Crate & Barrel without it.
come on kids. media is embedded. it's called "operation mockingbird".
You didn't say proof but you said it's better than guessing, and I don't agree with you at all. What if there is a correlation between Vegetarian-lifestyle and Serial-killers ? Does it tell you that it's better than guessing ? Do you even question if the association/correlation makes remote sense ? Is there any underlying mechanism of action that would remotely explain rationally why this correlation could be linked to any real causation phenomenon ?

Correlation is useless, and there's a ton of observational studies out there finding correlations every single day for which we have no rational explanation at all. Observational studies are full of variations in the way they are designed, the way they are reported and the subjects of the studies, it's rather a miracle if you actually detect a hint of causation based on the garbage noise that you get.
Isn't this the point of the coin? Iceland's government made it illegal to use Bitcoin, so nobody can buy into the currency. By giving the premined coins to Icelandic citizens, they are trying to create a stable crypto ecosystem and help icelanders avoid the legal repercussions of the Icelandic Foreign Exchange act.

The wiki page you linked said this:
"commentators suggest bitcoins mined within Iceland could be freely traded."

The premine is expressly for this purpose.
This wouldn't help a rocket. For a rocket you should just aim a laser at it.

But you still need reaction mass, and pure energy doesn't work well for that.
C++ doesn't need type classes as it has more powerful overloading.

this is valid C++14:

template<typename A, typename B>
auto add(A a, B b)
{
return a + b;
}
A side issue for the maintainer of the website: for widths of 800px and below, the website has no padding at all on the sides, and up to around 880px and below the article's title is cut off on the left (only part of the S in "» TLS" is visible—the rest is cut off on the left).
You'll find that clinical trials are regularly halted when the treatment is found to be markedly superior or inferior to placebo or the control group.

The original study that showed aspirin's effect on heart attack prevention comes to mind for the former circumstance, and a number of HIV prevention studies for the latter.
Hmmm. so it always takes you a long time to debug a language that you clearly don't actually know?

What a terrible language!

I don't know Python very well. I've worked on some python code but every time I do I have go read the manual for the most basic stuff (what does an "if" statement look like in Python, again?). But I wouldn't ever dare to blame Python for the fact that I don't actually know it!
I believe we're in violent agreement!
Pitch to the Estonian President
The SEC already has this problem. Those with sophisticated enough financial knowledge to regulate the best are already hired up by the big financials where they can make more money. Anyone at SEC is likely to be a better than average stock picker. This study might be flawed. They need to measure the SEC against the hedge funds and mutual fund pros. If they beat those guys, who already beat the market then maybe there is something fishy going on.
The trade is a victimless crime.

Like punching someone in the dark!
I think this problem is something the folks at https://pokitdok.com/ are trying to solve
The best I've come up with so far searching for information on MOPs (of the explicit, controllable sort) in those languages is sort-of/almost for Ruby and no for Python. Is there some other name they go by in those languages that I should be aware of?
5 Most Dangerous Roads
What size company do you work for? HN poll for average company size
It's tough in a court of public opinion, though. Especially when it comes to artistic works of fiction as interpretted by adversarial critics. Some of this is just so much gossip. Such is the life of the cartoonist who courts controversial topics, I suppose.

If the guy tries to explain himself, and only comes across as even more batshit insane, then I suppose that's his own tough luck (...or grand design, if that's what suits him). At any rate, when a person winds up in a hole, it's usually best to stop digging. From the sound of things, it seems entirely possible that he probably doesn't even really care, either way, anymore.
I agree with that. In the more general sense, do you think is a good approach doing monkey-patching, for a startup whose already made their first sales? Lets say we just raised money from an accelerator and no taking outside investment than that.

My main doubt about that is, do you think is a good approach to keep doing crappy code even if we're already doing money with this? And if not, when would be a good moment to start refactoring?
Even though the outcome won't make a difference for the general population, the individual parties are still competing against one another for who gets the power for this term.
1 employee!
My money is on people realising there will be a drop in value but want to get a return on the short term rise due to publicity between now and then. It's reasonable if you time it right but if everyone is playing the same game...
> it's a case where the offended person chose to make it personal and punish the other.

How exactly did the offended person punish her? By revealing to the world the true nature of KB?
I have a PhD in economics, and I was initially convinced by these arguments, but the are actually misleading.

If I have inside information, and there is a market with 1000 people, and I make $100 by doing insider trading, that money must come from the pockets of those 1000 people. This follows from the fact that the stock market is (for these purposes) a zero sum game.

The error in your argument is that (1) is false. You say "you just call your broker and ask to buy at the market price". But if every market participant was like that, then the order books wouldn't match and the market would break down. There must be some participants who are price elastic. And these are precisely the people whose decisions are effected on the margin, that is, the people who you cause to buy/sell when you engage in insider trading.

So when I buy shares with inside information (say I know the price will rise), I cause the price to rise by a tiny amount, and induce some people to sell who wouldn't have. Since these people wouldn't otherwise have sold, they lose money from my actions.

It is true that insider trading provides information to the market place, and so it is beneficial in that sense. However, it also creates asymmetric information and so harms liquidity. While there is always asymmetric information (I own stocks through my 401k, but I have no idea what MSFT should be worth), insider information is an especially extreme kind, and therefore especially harmful to liquidity.