skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The ACLU just agreed with the link, in your quotation no less:
The safest course of action is to obey the officer's directives.

It is difficult to know at the scene whether the order is proper, and failing to obey may result in an arrest, even though the arrest may not be proper.

You can't be found guilty of refusing to give a police officer pizza money, but that's not what the question is: can you can be found guilty of refusing a lawful order? Worse yet, as the link points out, the dead do not make reports to Internal Affairs.

Of course, the ACLU link you give says much more. Here's a choice extract to remember:
Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street.
Many people experience some ketone body production and metabolism well eating SAD (standard American diet). Fasting overnight and skipping breakfast, or having a long workout more than 4-5 hours after your last meal will cause this.

Nutritional ketosis, unlike ketoacidosis is a loosely defined term. Everyone has experienced it on some level. Perhaps just not at extreme levels like people pursing NK with vigour.
The problem with the analogical comparison between the tupples [birds, airplanes, flight] and [humans, AI-machines, intelligence] is that flight is a clear and ambiguous achievement whereas intelligence is something we haven't fully defined and for-which humans, we ourselves are our only accepted model (and self-interrogation is an activity that can feel easy but in-which we found many subtle and obvious problem).
Since this is not some across the board sweepingly true generalization, I suspect there are a number of factors at play as to when this helps and when it hurts. Some possibilities as to when and why it might hurt:

1) Social pressure to fail. Let's say you announce your plans to lose weight -- to your best friend who is also overweight and who bonds with you over burgers and beer on a regular basis. Or to your thin sibling who likes being "the attractive, thin sibling." Or someone else who has some reason to want you to not succeed, whether to preserve the current relationship or to preserve the pecking order (oh, god, how I loathe pecking order). You have just opened the door to letting them subtly sabotage you.

2) You don't really, truly want a promotion/weight loss/whatever, you just want other people to think highly of you. Announcing it can achieve the social recognition piece of it (in the short term -- until people decide you are a loser and failure for not doing it). In a case like this, it may have nothing to do with undermining your own actual goals. The whole point may be to get others off your back because you don't really want to do those things but you want to be liked, esteemed, whatever.

3) Announcing a goal to potential competitors who, again, have reason to want to undermine you or best you. So announcing a goal to get promoted at work to coworkers who are potential competitors can also result in opening yourself to sabotage or notifying someone else they need to work harder than you to beat you to it. If you want to get promoted, tell friends and family and maybe your boss but don't tell "the competition." Same with business goals or other goals where your success depends in part on outdoing someone else and where stating your goals may provide valuable intelligence to the enemy.

4) Situations where it looks like some kind of bragging because you are announcing something that seems like a really huge goal. People may undermine you out of spite or jealousy or just because they think you are talking BS.

I find it helps to talk to people about my goals in situations where such discussions help me move forward -- help me problem solve in some way. I find that ANNOUNCING -- LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME -- doesn't help. I mostly don't look for "emotional support" for my goals. If you need "emotional support" for your goals, yes, just announcing it may get you the warm fuzzies you were looking for without doing anything further. I look for practical support, not a cheerleading squad. I think that's probably the difference.
Hey, OP, I'm from Pakistan, but I thought you might like some comparative info, esp. since we are blocking youtube too.

----

Your resolver's source IP1 is:

58.27.204.243

1: Technically it's at least one of your resolver's IPv4 source addresses.

----

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\>tracert 8.8.8.8

Tracing route to google-public-dns-a.google.com [8.8.8.8]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 2 ms 1 ms 3 ms 192.168.0.1
2 59 ms 64 ms 69 ms 10.204.0.1
3 77 ms 99 ms * 58-27-174-122.wateen.net [58.27.174.122]
4 75 ms 84 ms 44 ms 58-27-174-65.wateen.net [58.27.174.65]
5 75 ms 78 ms 59 ms 58-27-180-190.wateen.net [58.27.180.190]
6 66 ms 63 ms 63 ms 58-27-174-26.wateen.net [58.27.174.26]
7 95 ms 104 ms 125 ms tw130-static117.tw1.com [119.63.130.117]
8 90 ms 104 ms 114 ms tw255-static233.tw1.com [110.93.255.233]
9 200 ms 219 ms 209 ms 72.14.222.151
10 229 ms 194 ms 225 ms 72.14.235.67
11 215 ms 228 ms 229 ms 72.14.232.78
12 194 ms 224 ms 224 ms 209.85.254.116
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 225 ms 234 ms 224 ms google-public-dns-a.google.com [8.8.8.8]

Trace complete.

----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias

CoffeeScript obviously solves problems. Its not compelling to you because of status quo bias, and because you don't want to invest the effort to learn it.

The issue with equality is a real issue. CoffeeScript solves that issue.

Braces and parenthesis _do_ become awkward in JavaScript with callbacks. CoffeeScript solves that problem.

You have been able to debug CoffeeScript as CoffeeScript for some time now with source maps. However, debugging the generated JavaScript is not hard for someone who knows JavaScript.
I haven't personally read it (shame on me!) David Herman and I spoke from time-to-time while I was at Mozilla and he's very smart, a very clear communicator and he knows the language as only a language lawyer can. He's actually a member of TC-39 (the ECMAScript committee) and had a big hand in the modules coming in ES6.

By every account I've seen, it's a great book and the only reason I haven't read it is that I've already been bitten by all of JS' pitfalls once or twice :)

The real reason I'm posting a comment, though, is to give you a link to the JS Jabber episode in which they talk to Dave about the book:

http://javascriptjabber.com/044-jsj-book-club-effective-java...

That episode will give you a good idea of what the book is like.
I think that depends on the project.

If the project was the entire grade, then yes that's a bit much.
But if we're talking about 1 of 10 assignments, then 10% really isn't that much.

I've had plenty of assignments were the granularity was just something like excellent, good, pass, fail.
I appreciate the definition of Big Data as requiring >1 machine.

However... Small Data, that which traditional researchers handle, is normally much, much smaller than that: perhaps 10-10000 data points (and most often on the small end of that). An experienced researcher can essentially can know everything about this data set, including its outliers and quirky points, and get a good sense of it by drawing out simple graphs.

There is clearly some disconnect between these two ideas: is that "Medium Data"?

I would accept a concept of "Big Data" as data that cannot easily be eyeballed to get a sense of what's going on, so 10000+ points would count (under some circumstances). Maybe the concept of "six sigma" is useful - enough data that you would reasonably expect a six sigma outlier.

Mathematically/statistically, the storage limit is not a particularly important milestone: the ideas and methods don't change once you reach this scale (except for potential parallelisation).
"I've seen Haskell programs that stop crashing when you pass in --debug !"

Haskell has a self correcting compiler.
A blog has users coming from two directions.

Readers visit the blog and consume the content. The application needs to serve pages that, as you correctly observed, are added occasionally, but don't change much. For a simple blog, there isn't much need for anything other than a static page.

From the other end, is the author. Think of the blogging engine as an authoring tool. Just like any application, you can choose to use a tool that runs on your computer (e.g., Jekyll), or you can choose to use a tool that runs as a web app (like WordPress).

The lines are blurred here, because it's entirely possible to just run Jekyll on a web server, using ssh to shell in and edit your blog files. If you keep your blog files in a Git repository on Github, as many people do, you can even do fancy stuff like auto-build on commit hooks. Then you can use Github as your authoring environment, and just commit as usual.

I think your argument really stems from an architecture shortcoming in the way WordPress works by default. There is certainly never any good reason for a web page that changes infrequently to lack any form of caching. The real question is where you do that caching. Using something like CloudFare in front of your WordPress blog is just as valid a decision as is using something like Jekyll, or adding caching to WordPress through something like WP Super Cache.
Actually, it would be much more expensive than that if you end up having to defend you patent in court http://www.cnet.com/news/how-much-is-that-patent-lawsuit-goi...
Gah. "still value signal more than you think they do". Sorry.
In C++, if I have a

std::list<Parent *>

then some of those pointers may actually point at a Child. The client code doesn't care. This is an important kind of polymorphism.

In Haskell, you can't reasonably express this with typeclasses, which surprises folks new to Haskell. You can still express it (as I mentioned), it just takes a different form (and precisely which form is best can vary with other considerations).
Appears the site was parsing a google spreadsheet in json form for part of the content. This is the likely reason for the change of content. Might it be quota issues from an HN/Slashdot effect? Probably not but just pointing out there could be many reasons for the content change.
You're forgiven - certainly calling out the lack of clarity was important!
Thanks! I will definitely dig into these. I absolutely agree regarding VC. Even if for some reason you DID want VC calling the shots, it's still way too early. If you look at the company itself in terms of an MVP, why go selling it to a customer before its ready?
> The great thing about capitalism is being left to carry the risk yourself.

When it comes to equity investments, and not Kickstarter-like donations, the type of disclosures that the SEC is going to require are in line with what any serious investor would want even if they weren't required. Managing risk (which is not the process of asking your gut for its opinion) requires some level of transparency.

Obviously, many investors are not sophisticated or diligent, so they won't even review the disclosures available to them, but you also have to look at equity crowdfunding from the perspective of the people raising capital. Disclosure provides them with desirable protections too. The last thing any founder needs is several hundred ignorant and/or lazy shareholders who are going to be calling up an attorney when their $1,000 investment doesn't produce the expected return, even if the expected return was completely unrealistic.

Bottom line: this notion that markets don't demand some level of disclosure and transparency without regulation is silly.
Sure, I agree this is not a sustainable practice for most people. I think to go through this and come out sane, "work" must have a different meaning than it does for most people. For the likes of Musk, working seems to be equivalent to being in a mission to change the world. When operating under this mindset, you work not just because what you're doing might lead you to a better socioeconomic situation, but because that is the most interesting & important thing you could possibly be doing, ever. Then "working" (for a lack of a better term) 100+ hours a week is nothing but having the most fun you could possibly have. It's the sense of purpose here that I think plays a major role in turning work into something that can subjectively be more meaningful than the things you mentioned.
Personally I never related to the "state your goal" advices. I guess that most of the times, other people simply don't care about your stated goal if it doesn't impact them personally. Also consider that most people who state goals fail to meet them (in my experience), so most people will not think about it twice and won't give you grief about it.
I think this has been posted at least twice before in the last few weeks.
Ha! Not necessarily those specific examples, but the overall reaction to it. Here are a couple of other articles which explain the same things:

Section "full of surprises": http://ruoyusun.com/2013/03/17/my-take-on-coffeescript.html

http://ceronman.com/2012/09/17/coffeescript-less-typing-bad-...

And here's an old HN comment of my own which described a few representative difficulties: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4518892

Also, there's no such thing as a global in CoffeeScript (unless you explicitly specify window.xyz), since everything is scoped to the file. And that's the point -- it's ridiculous to have to "look carefully" at all your code to see if functions further down share a variable name inside of them. In JavaScript, you don't need to worry about that because you know "var" scopes each variable to its function, regardless of whether a higher function or global variable uses the same name. In CoffeeScript, you suddenly do have to worry about that, which is fairly insidious and bug-prone behavior.
This is really cool. I'm reading more and more about hardware hacking; one of these days I may buy a soldering iron and actually build something.
By "semi-convenient" you actually mean cheap. If you're a cord cutter all you have to do is sign up for an ~$80/month cable package that includes HBO and HBO Go. You wouldn't even need to install a shitty cable box. You could just use the HBO Go login to watch from your computer, laptop, table, apple tv, xbox, playstation, or whatever.

That's extremely convenient. It is not cheap, but it is convenient. :)
> I don't think most people would agree with such a radical change.

Sure, the anti-slavery faction of the Republican party were called the "Radical Republicans" for a reason. I'm perfectly OK being the only person on earth that believes something.

Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus.

As another commenter mentioned, if you want to prove you are the producer of a good/service, you can find invent some way to do that, but it's on you.

Or some startup could invent a verification method and sell it (as a service) ..
Starting with Roles and Passions instead of Orgchart and Job Descriptions
Your argument is that because programmers who learned JavaScript first "have no issues" with the "bad parts" or "really bad parts" that means they aren't really issues, or that we should ignore the issues and adopt JavaScript anyway because we don't want people to think that we are old?
This may not change your view of whether their salary is high or low, but keep in mind that like most public sector workers, they are not eligible for Social Security benefits, and don’t pay Social Security taxes.
Using the type system to create less buggy code beyond what's done in mainstream statically typed languages (that are not types-all-the-way-down) is an interesting, but still very-much -open research question. The type system, beside being expressive, would need to be easy to understand and debug and require significantly less effort to wield than debugging less-typed code.

On a related note, I'm watching with interest how the new Java 8's pluggable type systems[1][2] would play out (I understand the project is expected to have a big released April 1st). Those are pluggable intersection types, that can be inferred and injected to legacy code that was written without them.

[1] http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/annotations/type...

[2] http://types.cs.washington.edu/checker-framework/
Hm.. well you may want to use more precise language in the future, because you said you "completely agree" and that it describes "exactly".

So you are saying that none of those particular issues are problems you are having today with CoffeeScript or were problems for most of the year?

In which case, what problems did you have?

Edit: it looks like in another thread you are pointing out some random and unmaintainable code examples that are ambiguous and saying that its hard to know how they will be interpreted by the compiler. Its hard to know how those examples would be interpreted by anyone, or why you would write code like that and create that problem for yourself.
I think we'd be a lot better off with much better medicine and medical treatments without IP. This is a whole other argument though, and I'll only engage if you want to.
I’d be interested in how it’s built. What app frameworks did you use? Is it written in Objective C? Etc. Thanks!
Who defines when a price is "far higher" than it could be? And who says they aren't operating at a loss?
> That kind of ontology is useful for writing requirements, use cases, tests, and so on. But that doesn’t mean that it’s useful for writing code the code that implements bank accounts.

Isn't good, easy readable code look very similar to requirements it was written upon?
You're making an assumption that they aren't now operating at a loss. I don't think they are but I wouldn't assume it. It wouldn't be the first time they've operated at a loss in an attempt to corner the market.
I've been editing video for 15+ years now, sometimes professionally, sometimes not. I mean Ridley Scott is not going to be hiring me to cut Prometheus 2 or anything like that but ... I have cut stuff that was in two AMA award shows, a cannibal corpse video that aired on MTV, a lot of previz for larger raves in the late 90's, a lot of the videos I do for experience retail installs now and a couple of years writing custom plug-ins (mostly for AE) for a post shop.

This is also my second video editor, the first one being Shave (http://www.maclife.com/article/reviews/shave_video_review) - which, unfortunately, got obsoleted with Mavericks (thanks Apple!).

Each of these videos I was cutting, which lead me to write VIX in the first place, are composed of anywhere from 25 to 60+ individual shots, sequenced into anywhere from 120-423 individual edits, depending on the effect we were going for. There is no way you are going to do that in 3 hours and end up with something near finished. You would be making, taking the average of 151 edits, 0.8 edits per minute for 180 minutes straight. The video you linked to had ~20 edits, discounting the time ramping/remapping you were doing. So I would expect that would take you 3 hours.

The video linked to in the blog post consists of 30 shots and 292 edits.

Now on the other end of the spectrum, this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hs9ut-gbYUU consists of 8 or 9 edits. I started it in VIX, built the structure in about 5 minutes and then finished in FCP and AE. So the edit itself took maybe 10 minutes, but an additional day of post work because the camera man who shot it had no idea what he was doing (it was our first shoot, so I wasn't as hands on as I should have been and was far too trusting than I should have been). I mean motion tracking to stabilize footage, they shot it at 30fps, so I had to optical flow it down to slow mo and then paint out distortions from that in photoshop, etc. The color wash and light leaks isn't there for aesthetics, it's there to distract you from the crappy camera work. It was a major pita.

I posted the beta to /r/editors on Reddit last week I think and got a ton of feedback from the pro's that hang out there, plus got a lot of input from people I've worked with who do post professionally/commercially, so it wasn't entirely developed in a void. I don't think it's the panacea of video editors though, but it is is a pretty cool creative tool that supplants FCP or AE. You won't edit a movie with it, but a music video, club video, behind the scenes video, skateboarding video, one guy from reddit was using it for wedding videos even. For that type of work, and of course I am totally biased, I can't see myself starting it in FCP. Finishing in FCP? Yes, for sure. But not starting, VIX is too fast to get to a good rough point.

Also, it's free. :) Well exporting to AE and FCP might be in app purchases for $5-$10, I haven't decided yet. The magazine and the publishing platform are my main biz, but I thought people would find this useful and/or fun.

Do give it a spin though and let me know what you think!
I disagree. I've never seen a program fail because of an unsafePerformIO call, but I've never seen a Haskell project that didn't suffer from at least one mysterious, hard-to-solve unevaluated-thunks-filling-up-RAM bug.

Even the company that was on HN recently cites thunk leaks as their biggest problem with Haskell: http://engineering.imvu.com/2014/03/24/what-its-like-to-use-...
Price out a Model S. They're as bad (or worse) as BMW as far as options go.

$80K with cloth seating. You don't even get the plug in charger standard, just a trickle charger. And the plug in is three times the price of a good 7kw charger. You don't even get Maps integration standard.

So yeah, unless they pull a 180 on the Model S options by 2017 I'd fully expect a Model C to ship with $10K in options as a rule, and come in a Leaf/Focus range matching version around 150 miles and a 250+ mile version for a substantial premium.

As a Leaf SL owner the only thing I don't have is the Bose audio system and the "around view" camera system.
I often upvote grey comments for that reason.

I have the impression that posts are more heavily downvoted now that the comment score is hidden.

It was rare to see comments become unreadable as it is now the case. I suppose that seeing the score allowed users to consider a given score as a sufficient punishment, and refrained from burying others deeper.

Maybe you could display the score when it's negative (that info is already conveyed by the shade of the text, but it is not quantitative)... or maybe cap the negative scale?

Some newbies make mistakes out of cluelessness, and by the time someone tells them to read the rules their total karma is way below zero. That's pretty harsh.
Metrics of an oppressive regime
> we have a screaming obviousness problem that the Federal Circuit is right at the center of

Let me give a cite for that. From [0]:

The [Federal Circuit] watered down the rule against obvious patents. Supreme Court precedents prior to the creation of the Federal Circuit held that merely combining two previously-known technologies in a straightforward fashion was too obvious to merit patent protection. To be patent eligible, the Supreme Court held, an invention needed to be "greater than the sum of its parts."

The Federal Circuit developed a more permissive rule that only allowed a combination of known components to be declared obvious if there was specific documentation that someone had suggested that combination prior to the patent application. The court adopted this rule to guard against the danger that hindsight bias would lead people to over-estimate an idea's obviousness. But the court seemed less concerned with the possibility that some combinations are so obvious that no one would bother writing them down.

[0] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/how-a-rogue-appea...
It hit the front page of reddit due to a backlash by users against mods of /r/Technology secretly removing all posts about Tesla. Users are upset and posting tons of posts about Tesla in protest. They are spelling it "Telsa" and "teslas motors" to get around the automated filter.