skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The district itself has a non-zero population. The problem is that it is split between three states, and the portion of the district that is in the state of Idaho has zero population.
Not sure what you mean, i don't see them that much. And they had some good stuff, like about manual scaling: http://blog.42floors.com/manual-scaling/
You know what? I don't think it is easier to learn to program now. Many years ago when I was a child and I got my first computer, it booted straight into a BASIC interpreter. The computer also came with a manual that taught you about if statements, for/next loops, gotos and gosubs. It showed you examples of how to draw to the screen and get inputs.

Compare that to today. There was nothing to install. It was all already there. There wasn't even an environment to launch, you booted into the REPL. You didn't have to hunt for tutorials on the internet, everything you needed to get started was in the manual that came with the computer. And everything in that manual was appropriate to the computer. You didn't have to worry about having the wrong version of dev environment, making the tutorial incorrect.

That's not to say that programming hasn't improved in other respects. I could spend years trying to build a basic TCP/IP stack on that old 8bit computer, which already comes pre-installed on a modern computer. I can grab a free copy of just about any language I've heard of. Huge numbers of libraries freely available allow me to stand on the shoulders of giants. But, nothing available today approaches the simplicity of that old 8 bit system for learning to program...
It's the lazy way of stopping users from cheating a minimum password length requirement.

To be fair, any other way would be lead to convoluted rules like "no consecutive spaces", "no leading/trailing spaces" or "spaces don't count towards the password length".

This is exactly why forcing users to use strong passwords is a shit idea in the first places. The rules either become ridiculously complicated or you disallow perfectly good passwords. There's no middle ground.
> The article paints this picture that "trial lawyers" can kill whatever bill they want. But the narrative is facially implausible. You're supposed to believe that trial lawyers get their way by throwing a lot of money around.

Trial lawyers have a different trick. When Pfizer or Qualcomm wants to know what impact proposed legislation will have on their business, who do you imagine they ask? I wonder how many firms disclosed the conflict of interest when furnishing the advice.
Public financing of campaigns would shut down K Street's electoral (campaigning) influence. Lobbyists could then resume their focus on policy.
We didn't "clone" it, but did reverse engineer it to the extent that we could manufacture a reliable supply of replacement parts and spares for the 4477th Test and Evaluation squadron.
See how many lines of code you've written
App shows you lines of code across each language for your public github repos
The U.S. has dominated the UN to the point where the UN is no longer credible. The U.S. staunchly promoted the authority of the Hague over everyone else while simultaneously denying its jurisdiction over U.S. corporations and citizens. The U.S. sat idly by while it's own corporations triggered famines and genocide, all to make a buck. The U.S. actively deposed unfriendly democracies and propped up friendly despots. The U.S. even failed to meet it's obligations in trade treaties, making any country who has signed a free trade treaty with the U.S. look foolish for allowing themselves to be made less "equal" than the U.S. is.

If China supplants the U.S. as the world's preeminent superpower only a small percentage of the world's populations will really notice. Ask yourselves this: If the U.S. was such a great brother to the world, why is that world so eager to deal with "the dreaded communist enemy"? China and Russia are both countries with dubious records in many respects, but the U.S. has behaved badly enough that the devil the world knows is no more appealing than the devils they do not know. Russia and China are probably torturing their prisoners, just as the U.S. is, but are they eavesdropping on every single conversation of entire nations? Are they trying to reforge the internet so that their corporations can make a few more bucks? Are they pressuring other nations to enact draconian anti-piracy laws that stifle innovation?

I'm not anti-American. The U.S. has explored more of space than any other nation. The U.S. is the world's longest surviving democracy, even if that democracy has been perverted into a plutocracy. Despite how the country is run and the dubious quality of its own students, the U.S.'s post-secondary academic institutions are still second to none, largely because they attract the world's best and brightest. However, the notion that U.S. control of the world is a fundamentally good thing is ridiculous, and it's past time even americans dropped it. Quite frankly, americans have squandered the gifts of their forefathers and desperately need to earn their place in the world again. The U.S. simply has not been a beacon to the world for a good long time.
The article is pretty old. Has anyone tried to exploit this loophole since then?
The top quintile is a useless bucket. It includes the top 1% and top 0.01%, which are of a completely different character from the rest of the top quintile. Those who control vast wealth hide in the watered down average -- Bill Gates does not belong in the same bucket as a young dentist.
Though people often criticise immutability on the ground that the machine code mutates registers and memory addresses as they're scarce resource, the compilers don't often generate such code directly. The compilers generate IR in the static single assignment form for better analysis and optimisation. That said, you should know why mutation is not inherently good, but a compromise to the pathetic reality. And now you know the technique to avoid mutation in general as well.
I moved to from Gmail to Fastmail last April, but this April, I moved back to Gmail. I have an email address (on my own domain) that I've used since the late 90's. It's all over the Internet in newsgroup archives, forums, etc. from before anyone was hiding emails from spam scrapers. Consequently I get several hundred spam per day. The FM spam filtering is no where near as good as G filtering. I had to manually flag as spam a couple dozen mails every day as well and go through the spam filter and pick out the false positives. I have no problems with G's spam filtering. The other problem with FM is administering multiple accounts on my domain. While it true it's only something I need to do once, as has been mentioned already, the settings/administration leaves much to be desired. Overall, using Gmail is just more pleasant to me, enough so that it outweighs the concerns (read: Google being creepy) that caused me to leave last April.
I really see your point on that. I am a hobbiest scripter, I know HTML/CSS, dabble in PHP and Javascript and can read a lot of C.

I tried learning Ruby/Rails a while back and spent 3-4 hours just trying to get the environment setup. I finally realized that Windows 7 was not a very popular OS to learn Ruby on and gave up.

On the contrary, getting a PHP/Python/Javascript "environment" setup is no problem. Notepad + a hosting account or any Linux/Mac and you are good to go.
... which is exactly what "limitless" means
In general, Burr-Brown, THAT corporation, some of Linear Technology's offerings... the rest will be the usual datasheet pain and suffering to find the best fit for the application.
If those libraries are open source, you can still do it. ;-)
Uhm, that's how I still learn new languages. Copy, paste, modify just to get something done.

The modify part leads to more concrete questions, more Googling, more detailed reading of docs, until at some point I'm engaged enough to go back to zero and actually start learning the language from the basics.

(This doesn't work for those languages who's paradigm you first need to understand before being able to do anything, but most languages allow for hacking straightforward procedural code at the basic level.)
What do the Piketty data problems really mean?
I don't see how setting business rules means that they aren't using a cryptographic hash. Can you explain why that has to be true?

Perhaps eliminating a frequently made mistake by people who don't have much computer expertise is the reason. Wouldn't it be possible that they have found that a large number of support requests for newly created accounts are due to people accidentally adding spaces? So by eliminating spaces, they can still hash the contents without a problem however they also reduce the support load and increase the usability by a subset of their users.
> Apple and Microsoft have managed to turn that line thoroughly into mud by weaponizing patent trolling as a tool to wage proxy wars.

1. Apple and MS have historically sued competitors with their own patents, which typically they practice themselves.

2. The only conceivable "proxy" may be Rockstar, and they claim to operate independently. If they didn't, well, the DOJ and FTC would be mighty interested [1].

>Patent trolling as a practice has quite clear contours:...

And my point was, Oracle clearly don't fit the bill. Heck, even IV don't fit that bill, because they apparently ask for pretty large licensing fees.

>Your explanation is belied by the number of patent nastygrams received by startups that can hardly be described as "large corporations."

Outside of cherrypicked media reports, there is insufficient empirical evidence that trolls target startups. I've been tracking trolls for a while, and trolls that go after the little guys are actually rare. The moment they do, there's inevitably some media outrage, and the number of unique trolls so far have been few (lodsys, scanner trolls, WiFi trolls... Fotomedia / photo sharing trolls about 7 years back... Any more?) By and large these pick on larger companies, because that's where the big money is.

1. http://m.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=2a10f894-6812-4... (ctrl-f "commitments")
Picketty has going for him he is looking in the right places. He's "barking up the right tree". Small data errors are like correcting a dog for poor syntax. The question for the dog is: are you barking up the right tree or the wrong one? If "the william shakespeare of dogs" himeself was 3 miles away srpouting out elizbethan sonnet-equivalent barks up the wrong tree...the verdict would still be the same. The first dog can hunt and the second cannot--the imperfection of the communication doesn't undermine the underlying correctness (in tree-selection).

The grammer-nazi type questions only matter insofar as they undermine the materiality of the analysis. What's important about picketty--notwithstanding the hype--is he's looking at balance-sheets not P&Ls. That is to say, he's barking up a different tree (than income obsessed economists). Probably the right tree--nobody would "analyse" the performance of a company without a blance sheet--for the task at hand.

But most macro-econ guys cannot link up the GDP equivalent to a balance sheet (they lack the data), and thus totally ignore everything a blance sheet would tell us about ROIC (eg: linkages of C & I). That is a huge "material mistake". And one that is not done or undone by general quality of the communication (eg: a typo in the maths, or a debate over "accounting adjustments")--provided those are not so massive as to be materially misleading.
Not all languages ignore backward compatibility. There's Fortran code written in the 1960s and C code written in the 1970s that will still compile correctly with today's compilers, even though these languages have evolved continually over the years.
I actually made a similar argument in a graduate psychology class at an ivy league as things got a bit heated over whether animals could suffer. I might have said something like, "If you get hit in the face in such a way you can't use words, how can I know you're actually suffering?"
Then again, Phil Plait is taking about much lesser effects like damaged satellites. He calculates this could happen at 5,000 light years from a magnetar; that implies (flipping my calculation around) that a GRB could do that all the way from another galaxy (..if it's a "nearby" galaxy).
My mom taking python on coursers constantly feels lost and stupid. She's doing it again even though she passed last time.

I remember feeling that way when I was eleven, teaching myself. But I think this feeling goes away with self confidence and experience.
It is so important to foster and support the growth of the CS curriculm, at all levels but at the university level especially. We need these classes to be well taught, and well funded. If 1000 students all want to learn the same thing, that's a lot of funding to do some really interesting and amazing things. This is not about provisioning more lecture halls!

The way students pick classes is a lot different from the way that a consumer spends money. You're already committed to spending a certain amount, especially if it's not impacting your major, class selection is a different set of variables. But I'm sure the surge in CS enrollment is at least partially mirrored in a broad increase of CSed spending overall.

What leaves me nervous is, I wonder if the tool set is really ready for mass adoption. The most direct effect of massively increased enrollment, and massively increased class size, will be overall more people who know how to code, which would be great, but also significantly lower median coder ability. Which will have a large impact over time.
Rockstar claim to have made commitments to the DOJ and FTC to operate independently [1]. What do you make of that?

1. http://m.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=2a10f894-6812-4... (ctrl-f "commitments")
So, encryption (as opposed to hashing) COULD be prone to frequency analysis (depending on the cipher used, ROT13 for example, ha ha!). IF that's what Yahoo! were using to protect their password data. But that's a big "if."

But, as you mentioned, hash funtions always produce a fixed-length string as their output, so, hypothetically, if an evil-doer comprised the whole Yahoo! password database, and saw randomized byte values of varying length stored for the password data, it would be obvious that the passwords were encrypted, and not hashed. In which case, you'd be right: they weren't hashed, they were encrypted.

But still, I don't think forbidding spaces necessarily precludes the use of hashes. I also don't think Yahoo! is using a space-delimited data format for storing password data. Or at least if they were, I'd be as shocked at that as I would be to find out that they protected passwords with ROT13 or triple DES (encrypting a password with AES might be conscionable though).

To answer your question:

> When did I suggest that?

I think I may have misinterpretted the following:

> If they hashed the user input, it wouldn't matter
what the client gave them in terms of password
requirements.

To me, I read that as "If they (being the client) hashed the user input, it wouldn't matter what the client gave..." my mistake.
Also: "Genetic algorithms are not really an off-the-shelf black box that you can just plug your data into and get results."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7712863
I've read a few of Dijkstra's EWDs, and his letter to the UT Budget Council re. their decision to switch from Haskell to Java for freshman programming. He always came across as someone who wrote with a very high signal/noise ratio.

Turns out even his speech was like that as well! I was eagerly absorbing every word.
I have heard of trials being moved to a nearby jurisdiction, usually when there is some conflict of interest in the original district (like if the defendant is a public official in the district). I would guess that moving a trial doesn't require a jury, so perhaps the prosecutor could just move the trial to the nearest district with residents.
Plot-Bot: Generates plots for Games, Books and Others
I've found the hardest thing about teaching people to program has become that there is a huge learning curve between the "simple" stuff and making real progress. I've been working on a device which will level that out a bit with an easier intro level.

I've found that interpretive languages, Python, Perl, or even BASIC can be less difficult to start because you can start exploring them right away. Compiled languages are harder because of the intermediate step.
I bet the person who maintained your code felt lost and stupid though! The benefit of libraries is that the reference exists at all.
> who do you imagine they ask?

I'd imagine they ask their general counsel, who would be corporate lawyers? Not sure how much those'd overlap with (or be affected by) trial lawyers.
For the author, typo on 'asking', " indicates an error, askign me to"
Meet the algorithm that can learn “everything about anything”
There will always be more weapons to shoot down each drone, at a lower cost, than there will be drones. The throw 10,000 drones at them approach will not shake the super powers.

Aircraft bombing runs against high powered military nations is long since over. It will never see a return as a broad strategy method.

The swarm strategy won't produce a winning side in any scenario except for ones in which a high-powered military takes on a weaker military. Nothing will fundamentally change about who dominates the global military sphere.
"We will not discuss genetic algorithms further, to discourage you from considering them for your applications."

Skiena in The Algorithm Design Manual, at the end of the three-paragraph blurb where he talks about them.
I usually look around me and pick 4-7 random objects, then take the first 3 letters of each. Is this secure?
please please consider hiring me.. Im at GS this summer and I really want to work in the crypto area when it is so important to me to be working in an area that can actually benefit humanity. Really, I want to help.
This line of thought has a long research history. Check it out at http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=fuzzing+machine+learning... .
> you don't need mutable local variables to track the state of the loop.

Erm, that's not really true is it? Isn't the main way which TCO is (usually? always?) done by introducing a counter/accumulator?

It does alleviate the kind of thing you see in c (or other similar languages):

while(int i = 0; i++; i < 10)
{
i--; // whoops
blah();
}

But you can hide that counter in many, many (useful) ways, like with iterators, or just some syntax that avoids modifying (or even checking) the counter variable in the loop.

So not having TCO is generally a way to avoid local state variables (but an ever expanding, eventually overflowing stack), implementing TCO tends to re-introduce a counter to avoid growing the stack (and then you have clever ways to emulate stack frames based on how far you got in the loop... sort of giving you the best (and/or worst) of both worlds).

Anyway, if all you want is a safe loop construct, recursion isn't the only option.

(All that said, I like the elegance of "lets pretend the call stack is infinite"-recursion -- and like the idea of TCO. Just don't oversell it.)
I'm pretty sure from 2007 till 2014 they made some changes to allow users to log on using Facebook/Google accounts, and they reverted in recent months
I mean this in the best way possible, but do you like actually take your mouse over to the webpage, highlight the code, copy it, and then paste it into your editor? I am genuinely curious.
Not really. If you assume a relatively even distribution of the rate at which people sell homes. For example, let's take those 100 people and assume that on average they sell their home every ten years. In any given year, 10 of those people will sell their homes, realising their capital gains. Now, because you have 100 people, the average increase will be divided by 10 (100/10). Which is exactly what you would get if you amortise those capital gains over the ten years. Large numbers of people smooths out lumpiness of individual income.
I think your site is down :)
> for-contract

As in, someone who needs some custom cryptocoin work done could retain your services?
But those are just examples. You would have the same issue with state-level regulatory capture with finance in New York, or internet and other utility providers capturing the states they provide service in, etc. And then there's antitrust and copyright and other such things that essentially have to be done at the federal level because they have national scope.

There are certainly things currently done by the feds that could be reasonably handed over to the states. Social security comes to mind as a big one. But social spending is hardly the area where moving that out of Washington would make the largest dent in K Street.
No one said that index funds always go up but they do return more than 4% (nominal) as a long term average. I bet that the calculator uses 4% as the default because they assume a relatively conservative portfolio such as 50% bonds & 50% stocks. That portfolio may be appropriate for many people, but it is substantially less risky than tying up your entire net worth (plus more?) in a single house.
Yes many sites do require that, but Yahoo? I expected a little more from them, does it even make any sense to have such password requirements anymore?
Also, I can't tell for sure if the phone verification is optional, it could be required for new sign ups randomly.
Yea I most definitely can, but I will definitely don't feel like logging in anymore.
The bottom line is that you can't fly a bunch of planes around an airspace without losing a few, and the people who build and fly these planes know this.

Second, the technology behind bare-bones drone surveillance isn't that special. For $250 you can get an "FPV" remote control plane (first-person view) that lets you fly around and see a real-time video-feed from the plane. Of course the RQ-170 is a million times more powerful than a Walmart toy, but the fact of the matter is that any government that wants to can put surveillance drones in the sky.
Which US corporations triggered genocide and famines, and in which countries?
I'm waiting to hear how interesting effects carbon nanotubes and Buckyballs will have on our environment. When all kind of products are going to contain those.
'Oof', the Financial Derivative of Choosy Moms™

Marketing will be everything in the new economy.
Nothing says "true love" like jewelry deception...
I was going to post a comment with similar points, but instead Ill just add to srean's ideas.

If nothing is known about the objective function, no optimization algorithm can possibly be said to be better than any other. This is the no free lunch theorem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_theorem

So there is absolutely no sense in talking about optimization algorithms in isolation from the problems they're meant to solve. An intelligent appraisal of genetic algorithms would talk about the types of objective functions they seem to be able to find good answers for.
At least when you log in to flickr, you don't get the message "Hello- new account signups are temporarily unavailable from this network address space used by your Internet Service Provider", as I've been getting for so long.

Maybe some day, Yahoo will get their heads out of their asses and restore access to my old photos. I'm not holding my breath.
I like

\usepackage[osf]{sourcecodepro}

It might be idiosyncratic preferences, but I like the height variation in monospace letters.

You might also want to use

\DisableLigatures{family = tt*}

from the microtype package. It doesn't normally matter, but the sourcecodepro package has an "fl" ligature that's usually unwelcome.
If you have 10/100 people selling their homes in a given year, then 10% of people earn 100% of the capital income. This is true in spite of a completely equal distribution of wealth. The fact that the 10% number is stable over time doesn't change this.

Capital income and wealth are simply not the same thing.