skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not just about consistency. The post mentioned 5 different standards of "truth". In reality the method we use to judge something to be true or false is not uniform : there are lots of variations, even within single sciences.

My point is that for all the methods the parent poster pointed out, science does not actually fare better than (Christian) faith, barring a few exceptions.

He cherry-picks little pieces of specific theories that satisfy a high standard of truth, I merely point out that, first that does not mean science as a whole satisfies that standard, second you can do the same for the bible. And, when it comes to historical opinions that were held up using less-than-gentle means, science also has loads of black spots. E.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism, so again that is not a valid criticism of faith, or at least isn't black and white.

As an alternative I defend utilitarianism : scientific theories are not true or false, or better or worse than the bible, but they are more useful in some cases. Nobody will design a cell phone using the bible. Nobody should base their moral decisions on biology.

The big problem here seems to be that Christianity uses internally the same standards of truth to some extent, and so it can be attacked on those points. It's actually pretty consistent so I think the attacks against it are less than convincing, because there is no better alternative, there is just a completely unjustified faith in science that makes no sense whatsoever : logic, the branch that actually analyses whether science could be wrong and how and why trust in science should exist, has a simple conclusion since the 1950s or so : science fails it's own standards. Somehow this part is always missing from these arguments : there is nothing to back them.
I like the irony of raising money to "reduce the influence of money in politics".

At the same time, well done. $5 Billion dollars raised is an incredible feat. I'm not American, but hopefully if they are successful in actually implementing the changes they propose, other countries will follow suit.

My concern is that if corporate $$ buys less influence in Washington, it might enable them to buy more influence in other places (eg. Canada), and that corporate influence could have a negative effect not only on Canada itself, but retaliatory effects on the US. Think if the Oil industry doesn't get it's way in the US, they start influencing Canadian policy to not ship Canadian oil (or less of it) to the US, resulting in a cost spike for the states. Similar things could happen with other natural resources.

But well done for Lawrence Lessig and the rest of the MayDay gang. As he states, this is just the beginning of a very challenging and amazing initiative.
Your last question is a bit loaded with a bunch of "ifs", so let's unwind it. I don't know what MongoDB will "support" as far as other engines go. But assuming we, Tokutek, release something that we support that is our engine plugged into 2.8 using MongoDB's storage engine plugin, then according to the design we heard about at MongoDBWorld, that product will be what you think it is: Mongo with geo and "other bells", and TokuMX's compression + write performance.

But 2.8 is a bit away and the storage engine API is a very fresh development. I don't think anyone is in a position to be able to really guarantee what it would look like and how TokuFT (https://github.com/Tokutek/ft-index/) will plug into it. I definitely cannot make any promises.

If you are interested in TokuMX + some missing features from MongoDB (sounds like geo), and don't mind discussing your needs and use cases with our sales guys, please give us feedback at http://www.tokutek.com/contact/. As I mentioned previously, user feedback drives what we do, so at the very least, you can provide some additional data points.
Neymar to miss World Cup after breaking back vertebra vs. Colombia
Well, that one identified as 'gut' is the expert on telling happiness from sadness apart. Why wouldn't it be the best for predicting them?

(But no, I don't completely agree. It's just that it's a good question to answer, because it's so obviously partially right.)
In addition to sit down meditation, in my world view any activity you are fully involved in is meditative. That means that champion golfer, footballer, cricketer, coder, designer who are in the zone are meditating.
I guess slowing down an activity and observing it as in tai chi is similarly meditative.
That in essence is the point behind "Living in the Now" IMO.

These are easy to state but hard to practice and hence the allure of LSD's IMO
I love it! Very simple and straightforward interface. Makes it very easy to incorporate into a bigger workflow. You've followed the "do one thing well" command line tool philosophy to a T.
It's far more likely than you are unaware of how much our daily tasks are unconsciously automatic and how little credit you give the brain.
One of Damian's pictures in the article holds a quote where he says something about Rails enabling "not very strong" developers to build fairly sophisticated systems.

I wish the author had included that part of the interview. I never found it anywhere in the article.
IMHO, to continually put "success" above everything else in your life and slave away towards that goal as the ultimate redemption in everything is a waste of your time and therefore your life.

It can be such as easy sell, especially to people with low self-esteem... if only you were rich, had a great body, had success with the opposite sex, etc., etc. And always underlying it, but never spoken of, is the vain and self centered attempt to compare yourself to others and come out on top.

When these goals are achieved, rarely does anyone publicly say that it wasn't worth it. It's like a bad marriage rotting from the inside. No one wants to admit to being a fool. So stuff like this propagate, it's a beautiful lie. Rather than think of how awesome your life will be if you just work a little harder and achieve success, you might as well be talking about how great heaven will be as long as you follow some arbitrary religious text.

It's like you think someone out there is keeping score, and it's all some type of game which you can win. We came from nature, and in nature, nobody keeps score. Animals live and die on the basis of stupid luck all the time. On your death bed you probably won't be looking over your life and decide whether it was worthwhile or not, and give yourself some report card on it. Instead you more likely won't even remember more than bits and pieces, and then eventually die and forget it all.

The hero in the story is an Israeli soldier who decided to risk his life over a few dollars in his pocket. To do what, prove he was macho? He was really stupid in my book. And we're supposed to, according to the author, look up to this man? Train all our lives as a knife fighter, so we, too, can take dumb risks and be lucky enough to not get killed doing so? What if it went the other way, and the soldier friend was hurt or killed? Would the author still be putting him on a pedestal as he does so?

I'm not saying don't try. Just make sure you are enjoying what you are doing, first and foremost. If you're not happy, either motivate yourself in a positive way, or let it go. It really isn't worth it.
Show HN: "Happn" app security flaw - obtain Facebook IDs and full names of users
The ASA is an industry body -- it's not a government regulator. Which gives it much greater freedom to rule on this. (It's harder to sue, as it's a body that the industry signs up to in order to protect the reputation of the advertising industry in the UK.)
> You mean like how the United States itself was founded?

Or maybe the Khmer Rouge? When was the last time that a violent upheaval turned into a peaceful democracy?

[edit: Let's also be honest with ourselves here. The American Revolution did not overthrow a government. They didn't overthrow the British government. They drove them out from occupying a far-away land. I think that the American Revolutionaries would have had a much harder battle if they were attempting to overthrow the entire British government, even with the support of France.]

> Not sure. Maybe we'll have a lot of parades in 240 years.

The only downside to a violent revolution is 'parades in 240 years?' If you want to think that a violent revolution of the United States government will turn out all ponies and rainbows, that's your prerogative, but at least be honest with yourself about the risks of ending up with a less than desirable result.

Some less than desirable results:

* Skinheads or some radical fundamentalist Christian group use the chaos to seize power.

* Revolutionaries take a "either you're with us or against us approach." Conscientious objectors like the Quakers or the Mennonites are slaughtered wholesale for refusing to take part / take sides.

* Witch-hunts abound as 'revolutionaries' search out "1%-ers" to hold public executions. Anyone drawing parallels to McCarthy-ism, Nazism, or the Salem Witch Trials is branded a sympathizer and executed as well.

* The US is divided into several smaller nation-states each controlled by groups with competing interests. Years of war, bloodshed, cease-fires, broken cease-fires, border-skirmishes, etc ensue.

* Disruption of the government leads to disruption of the supply-chain feeding modern society with food. Mass starvation ensues.

* The revolution is successful, but the disruption of the US government leads to global economic depression. Foreign-relations suffer severely as the new government, spear-headed by the leaders of the revolution, is viewed as the cause of the depression, and scapegoat for all their suffering. Perhaps said global depression triggers a new, global wave of nationalism & isolationism, global relations nose-dive as a result.
This article is more about perseverance and hard work then it is about intelligence.
*million dollars, a little correction
With odds at one in 176 million the only people who succeed in winning the lottery are those stupid enough to try.
$5 Million
It is misguiding to say that boto supports Python 3. The boto3 repository (https://github.com/boto/boto3) is experimental and far from feature completion. I am even not sure if it's API compatible with boto. Further, it has been dormant for quite some time.

boto3: https://github.com/boto/boto3/tree/develop/boto3

boto: https://github.com/boto/boto/tree/develop/boto

It don't understand why python3wos changed its status.
Most basic scraping libraries require you to input a bunch of regexs or css selectors to manually specify what you want to extract from a page. They require custom coding for each page you want to scrape. This library is totally automatic - you just pass in an html page and it returns the most 'texty' text on the page with no custom coding.

There are of course other libraries like this (boilerpipe, Goose, etc), but they tend to be written in Java and Python. The very few existing Node solutions didn't fit my needs so I hacked this together. So for people looking for a quick and simple Node solution, this might be useful.
$5 Million. With an M. Hopefully that's a typo on your part ;)

Could be true. Not to say Canada's campaign financing is perfect.. it is not. But we don't have Super PACs, which is nice.
I too thought some of the prescriptions were a little strange, but I think the author brought it down to earth with:

We need a new set of criteria. We should wonder:

- how are they mad

- how can one raise children with them

- how can one develop together

- how can one remain friends
Bugzilla Performance
>>> somebody being wealthy is not any sort of proof

It's not a proof, but it's higher probability, by the virtue that in majority of cases being reach means producing value (at least in the past, as your own links prove) - and if the person produced a lot of value in the past, there's a big chance he'll continue doing that.
As for the question if it makes the world better - it's a very subjective matter, everybody has their own "better". I think it'd be better if Uber would disrupt taxi cartels, but taxi cartels and medallion investors think it'd be worse.

>>> It's frustrating to have to connect the dots for you.

That may be because the dots are connected by non-sequiturs. E.g., the question if somebody was lucky or not bears no relation to the question if he produces or ever produced value. A quote of how one could rapidly become rich three hundred years ago has little connection to how the majority of rich people slowly become rich now. Etc, etc.
Honestly, that SEO firm should be taken to court for fraud. The advice is malicious and anyone who knows anything knows it will do material damage to the performance of the website costing the company revenue, branding and opportunity. Just because someone claims to be an expert doesn't make them one and it certainly doesn't make them good at what they do. I would check their references and look for horror stories based on the advice they are providing they must have a lot of unhappy customers out there and unhappy people like to complain on the internet.
And if you don't feel like shelling out the money, Lessig has posted a PDF of the book online (presumably under a Creative Commons license, but I didn't check into it that far as I already own the book)

http://lesterland.lessig.org/pdf/republic-lost.pdf
Human level artificial intelligence is a distance dream but can't say, virtual assistants like Google Now (http://www.google.com/landing/now/) and Braina (http://www.brainasoft.com/braina/) are already doing a decent job. May be we have to wait for 10 more years to achieve what is called AI-Complete or Strong AI.
How does this compare to Apache Tika? There is also a Node wrapper for Tika but don't remember the name of the module off the top of my head.
Most popular GPUs for firefox nightly users
We didn't need GEO indexing but what Toku does offer is pretty exciting. Primary wins for us include multi-query transactions, compression, fractal tree indexes (thus overall insert and query performance), and clustering indexes.
Canada's Tech Scene needs 'aggressiveness and boldness'
Auto assembly, though? That is the kind of thing that requires full attention to prevent injury.
I make an educated guess that Yahoo has a valid license for a public project like this ;-)

> it is prohibited to generate their keypoints, even if it is to compare to your own

But you can still compare them against each other and against other data sets.
1. IQ

2. Think he meant necessary.
Russian Government Will Force Companies To Store Citizen Data Locally
Video: Fireworks filmed with a drone
I often hear that these types of drugs can change the way you see the world. As someone who has never taken a psychedelic I wonder if my highly scientific/atheist view of the world will shift after taking a shroom? Can anyone relate?
Lessig's last e-mail: http://pastebin.com/AUdh8Dav
I was really surprised for a second. 5 billion raised is a huge sum which would mean either mass contributions from extremely wealthy individuals or that pretty much everybody is US chipped in. 5 million though is less than 1% of what was spent on presidential elections alone by each side (Obama side spent 779M, Romney side 704M [1]). This is not counting what is being spent in congressional, state, local, etc. elections and what is being spent on one-issue campaigns. For example, just prop 8 campaign in California took 70M [2].

I am not sure what exactly these guys plan to do (my conviction is any law compatible with the First Amendment can not prevent political spending as public speech on national scale costs a lot of money and content-based regulations on such speech to exclude political speech are in direct contradiction with current understanding of First Amendment both by the courts and the public) and their descriptions are very vague ("agnostic about the specific legislation") - I don't think 5 million is going to take them too far. They might support some candidates from the left that already campaign on the issue of "big money stole our politics" (while taking big money like everybody else of course) but those guys were already for it anyway, and I don't think you can tip too many congressional elections with 5 million. We'll see I guess.

[1] http://www.cnbc.com/id/49550998/
[2] http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_8,_the_%22Elim...
It's not the boto3 repository, it's just boto, at https://github.com/boto/boto

Maybe it's gone green because the boto project maintainers have closed this issue:

https://github.com/boto/boto/issues/677 - at the end of the thread Daniel Taylor says 'Python 3 support now works for S3, SQS, Kinesis, and CloudTrail'

What is it that makes a project go green on the wos?

These pull requests seem to indicate that someone has completed work on a whole bunch of other modules to make them Python 3 compatible but the pull requests have not yet been integrated.

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2354

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2355

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2356

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2357

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2358

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2359

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2361

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2362

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2363

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2364

https://github.com/boto/boto/pull/2365

So maybe its close but not there yet. Strange that the pythonwos is showing it as green.

I'm using the latest version from github for S3 access with Python 3 and it works fine.
I'm sure Apache Tika is much more capable. For example, it supports html, csv, ppt, etc instead of just html. But it also requires Java/Maven and the installation process is far from simple.

Unfluff is a small, simple .js library that can be installed and used in seconds. It doesn't have any external dependencies on data files or other language runtimes. So it just depends on which tool is right for your job. If you are writing a quick script, this might be a lot easier to use.
One argument you missed is that there is really not much of a problem to solve; money in politics is not significantly distorting the will of the people.

There is very little evidence that there are consistent correlations between money in politics and success in politics. For example the Sunlight Foundation found that all the extra outside spending in 2012 (post-Citizens-United) had no measurable correlation with who won election.

Arguments that it is a problem typically center around this or that "bad" law; but there is no guarantee that a representative democracy will make every citizen happy.

Focusing on money also ignores the many other potential influences in politics, like regional culture, religion, ideology, gender, sexism, racism, etc.
Not from the US, but I wanted to congratulate everyone involved in this historic event.
I think it is inspiring, apart from being inherently relevant worldwide.
A better system might be mandated savings. This is not redistribution, so the only cost is enforcing the scheme. Australia has this in the form of compulsory superannuation, and Singapore has it in the form of the Central Provident Fund. This prevents people with poor self control from squandering all their income. It also contributes to overall economic growth, by increasing the national savings rate and hence increasing the amount that can be invested.

Note that the American Social Security system is not a mandatory savings scheme. The money paid into it is not necessarily saved/invested, and can in fact be spent by the government however it wishes. The amount of money a person receives back from the scheme is also not proportional to the amount they paid in.
Show HN: Pythonpy - Tab completion for python -c
See my other comment. The work is being done on boto, not boto3.
Djangop sample app showing bootstrap layout, mvc, and login
Extremely weak article for 538.

It talks about how > 50% of bachelor degrees in STEM are earned by women(according to the NSF). Then it talks about how ~39% of STEM jobs are held by women(according to a different org with probably different standards - the ACS).

Why don't they care about the great injustice being perpetrated against men by women earning more than their fair share of degrees in a field? Why don't they account for the differences in bookkeeping between the NSF and the ACS?

Why doesn't it compare these numbers and the degree-to-work dropoff to other non-STEM fields?

Then it talks about "27 percent said they find their careers stalling due to workplace sexism". Why don't they talk about how that number relates to other fields? Or how it relates to mens numbers for the same question in the same field? Or the same question in different fields.
Git usage in 1988
Indeed, thus the recent regulatory push to require people to buy health insurance whether they want it or not.
There's a somewhat popular novel that deals with this called The Forever War.
I dunno how much it cost exactly but I'm sure that making and distributing "Hillary: The Movie" cost a lot more than 50 bucks. Limiting individuals to that total is a restriction on their speech.

Now, maybe that's a restriction that we want to impose but it's disingenuous to say it's not a restriction.
At first (before I RTFA) I was going to come here to disagree vehemently. There are severe founder-quality issues right now and a lot of that has to do with low-IQ people who failed out of banking or management consulting getting funded, while actually smart people with less social polish get fuck-all. 140+ IQ doesn't mean much, but I'd fund a 140+ over a well-connected douchebag any day of the year. The problem is that so many not-smart people (Spiegel, Duplan) are getting funded and it's generating such a slew of crap companies that the rising generation (Millennials) may have lost the knowledge necessary to build good ones.

Then I RTFA and found that I agree, wholeheartedly. The metaphor he gives is of an overconfident assailant who has a knife, but is untrained and is beaten by a bare-handed opponent.

Correctly, we assess our enemies in office politics as being stupider. That VP/NTWTFK (Non-Technical Who-The-Fuck-Knows) doesn't know what a monad is. He probably couldn't write a for-loop to save his own dick. Those bikeshedding "big picture guys" who "do product" aren't intellectually sophisticated people. All that said, they continue to beat the piss out of us in the game of office politics. They do nothing but, somehow, get paid twice as much and get to make a lot of decisions that we ought to be making. As a group, we have to stop fucking moping, figure out why, and change it.

Too many software engineers are so self-congratulatory about their intellectual ability, and too easily swayed by bullshit perks, to realize that they're actually getting robbed blind by jerks in The Business who aren't nearly as smart (they don't have the knife) but who've been training at social machination and in dominating other people for as long as we've been studying computers.

We have to stop thinking it's "dirty" or undignified or unprofessional to "get political" and figure out a way to get our due. We have to stop putting our heads in the sand and saying "I just want to code". We are a hard-working group (even the smart ones work really hard) but we need to accept that some of that hard work is going to have to involve learning CS 666 (software politics), as ugly as the skill may be, and playing to win, to fucking demolish our enemies instead of having them defeat us.
Just to be clear: they raised $5 million, not $5 billion. (I think the original commenter mixed up the two)