skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Smart people have a problem, especially (although not only) when you put them in large groups. That problem is an ability to convincingly rationalize nearly anything.

This applies to anyone and everyone about 2 yrs old+. He thinks average and dumb people don't do this? They do it and their reasons don't even have to be half intelligible or make sense logically.
I caved and started reading A Song Of Ice And Fire after Game of Thrones S4 finished broadcasting. First book was good, and I'm just starting the second. I've also been binging on cheap self-published horror and apocalypse ebook collections from Amazon (just can't resist those 99p anthologies), and my ongoing 'serious' book is Work by Studs Terkel. Like a couple of other books mentioned in this thread, this is a real eye-opener that reminds me how lucky I am.
Yes I assumed a 300 flat rate from the previous comment, but you're right he mentions 10% in his post.
> It costs 0.8 cents to update a namecoin domain
That's not fair to say.

It costs like this because the namecoin price is so low. However, if it was used more, the price would skyrocket.
I think you completely misunderstood me.

Let's compare the following two scenarios:

- 10,000 people live in log cabins in 1,000,000 acres.

- 10,000 people live in 100 acres.

Let's suppose the people living in log cabins use a hundred times as much energy as the second group.

Clearly from an energy standpoint, that isn't good. But the second group has completely and utterly decimated 100 acres, while the first has minimal impact on the land.

Basically, in summary, even if consumption goes up as we spread out, the amount of impact experienced by a given area of land decreases as our impact is diluted over a larger area.

Phrased differently, it's easier for native organisms to survive if humans are spread out, than if we bulldoze their habitat and build highrises.
You could also look at Shark, which is basically Hive on Spark.

http://shark.cs.berkeley.edu/
> How is it childish? It's business.

It's funny you say that. In many companies you can hear people saying "it's nothing personal, just business" (you also hear the same from movie villains, oh well).

At Apple, for as long as I remember, it's exactly the opposite: it's not just business, it's always personal.

If you hurt Apple, Apple will hurt you back.

You can think of Apple as a smart, powerful, spoiled prince/princess. If you have something the prince(ss) wants, they'll try to be friends with you and shower you with gifts. But if you go this path you better never end up on their bad side.

It may seem childish to some, but as far as game theory goes, this kind if behavior makes one's choices and outcomes very clear when you interact with Apple.
Cookie Overdose
RubyGems.org migrating to new infrastructure
An inspired TED speech about binary data visualisation method
Show HN: OvaFlow Founders
A little blog about the founders of OvaFlow
I have a couple of questions for the people on here who actually understand all this stuff.

The argument, as I understand it, for why it is useful to have HFTs in markets like the one in the article, is that they provide extra liquidity. My understanding of liquidity is that it is some kind of measure of how quickly an asset can be sold. I'm sure there are some formal definitions, but that has to be something like [asset value/sale time], where larger is more liquid.

It seems to me, though, that liquidity is necessarily very time-scale dependent. For example, there is basically no liquidity in any market at the picosecond (or whatever is faster than current trading) timescale, because (by definition) no-one trades that fast. So really, although liquidity can be calculated as a rate, it is more appropriate to look at the distribution of available liquidity over different time scales. In other words, being able to sell $10 of assets in 10 days is not really the same as being able to sell $1 of assets every day for 10 days.

My questions are:

1) is my understanding of liquidity as being timescale dependent correct, and if not, why not?

2) if yes, what is the social value of "faster" liquidity?

3) if "faster" liquidity has greater social value, is there any point at which the cost of maintaining that liquidity (which is what I understand HFT profits to be) exceeds the value of having liquidity at that timescale?

edit: spacing for visual clarity
They were dating and they broke up. This is all a teenager break up story. Just they have the money and publicity to tell the whole world about it.

Hes still guilty of harassment. But I'm sure if more records were released We would see a lot that makes her look bad and probably guilty of similiar crimes if not the same ones.

This is why no established company allows dating in the work place. Break up arguments are now workplace harassment charges.
Funny ... I had the same impression of some managers. Simply could not accept that certain things are unpredictable. The other thing is that there are places where ambiguity is wrong e.g., documentation. Which was hard to accept for some managers and analysts. I can not write ambiguous code, it ends up doing either one thing or another.

Notice the some in my sentences. I managed not to offend whole profession of people.
Ah, right. I still think there are two mitigating factors here to what I said.

First: In the stagflation of the 1970s (which is really the only significant empirical data point we can draw from), increased interest rates were a political choice made by the central bank rather than an economic necessity.

Second, and more importantly: Stagflation is characterized by inflation, which means that nominal GDP grows even while real GDP is stagnating.

Since real GDP is irrelevant to the debt-to-GDP ratio (witness the debt-to-GDP ratio through the 1970s), the conclusions for whether one should worry about the debt-to-GDP ratio remains the same as far as I can tell.
I bailed on G+ for photo hosting. Imgur is vastly superior for my needs:

• There's the option of anonymous photo hosting.

• I can distinguish between uploading and sharing images. On G+ if you upload an image you must "share" it then and there, or it's forever private.

• Useful annotations and titles. Roughly comparable, but I prefer Imgur's tools.

• Better album options. In particular, I can figure out how to add images to specific albums in Imgur. G+ is fucking opaque on this. Yes, I'd prefer to be able to add an image to an album from the image rather than by navigating to the album first.

• Share an image to User Sub or another gallery and enjoy the fun. Or just build up a library of images associated with my subreddit and/or blog (my primary use of Imgur).

All the fancy-schmancy image editing tools G+ offers? I don't use 'em. I've got The GIMP, it's good enough for me.
Thanks very much! That's just what I was looking for.
No, this app is predatory and profiteering of tax payer owned property.

People using that app are a bunch of highwaymen trying to extort a "bridge toll", if you ask me.
Is UX only fantasy
It's the same play in both cases - creating extra friction when you step outside of Apple's ecosystem.

Users who switch to an Android phone aren't any more "lost" to Apple than developers who publish on Android. They often still have iPads, iPods and/or Macs. Some might still buy music and/or video from iTunes. And so on.

In both cases, Apple is choosing to risk losing X as well in order to increase their chances of holding onto Y. And since we see other companies making both choices, it isn't an obviously winning or losing play in either case.
You go to court make a claim (copyright, trademark, or in this case negligence). Then with the judgement in hand fax that over to the registrar who has no choice but to comply. If the registrar won't comply you kick it up to the national body.

This has been going on for years. You don't own a domain name you just rent it.
That distorted graph is pretty explainable by the fact that he has only 6 data-points, and that by default Excel's graphs just treated those dates as labels (instead of a time series).
I'm afraid that saying "just ask the PIIGS" is to miss the crucial point. Those countries are members of the Eurozone, and therefore their governments are currency users rather than issuers. Therefore, an analysis that draws upon your everyday household experience carries at least some water, even though it is entirely inapplicable to a monetarily sovereign government such as the US government.

Other than that, I can only recommend that you try to consider all the relevant dynamic effects in the macroeconomy. For example, if money would indeed become worthless, this would not happen overnight due to the immense inertia of an economy as large as the US economy. It would be a drawn out process.

Throughout that process, as a consequence of money losing value, the nominal GDP would increase, and therefore the debt-to-GDP ratio would decrease, which means that the system has a very strong self-stabilizing tendency.
I'm curious to see when those things actually result in better code. A template tag is usually a much better idea and hardly onerous in terms of time or code.

Django's opinionated stance on this helped me to become a better developer. It pushed that stuff back into my views - which in turn made me realise that a lot of the stuff I'd been putting in my views really should be pushed back into a layer below that. It set me on the path to understanding the value of a good separation of concerns.
Your argument is that we can't have an optional feature that provides stronger anonymity because when you use it there could be a few ms of latency that would be intolerable to some applications that aren't required to use it?
Case in point: Isaac Newton falsifying experimental evidence in order to defend his ideas on optics. (See chapter 3 of Plastic Fantastic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780230224... .)
I take your point, the study demonstrates the problem.

However I would counter that the problem is that people are doing it wrong. They shouldn't be linking to a specific minor or patch version, just linking to the major version they want:

http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js

Which would mean you'd get nearly a 13% chance of a hit.

Plus the maths didn't really (and couldn't really) factor in the popularity of sites. If I use the same jQuery as Google's homepage (which they don't but just hypothetically imagine they did) then they'd show up as one data point in the analysis. However the vast majority of web users would then have that in their cache.

I still believe JavaScript CDN used correctly, has the potential to offer improvements. It's just unfortunate that people are doing it wrong.
Ask HN: How to craft a user agreement to limit personal liability before LLC?
The context is a small encrypted note taking app.
IBM: Commercial Nanotube Transistors Are Coming Soon
I have about 5 Richard Johns using my Gmail address. No matter how many times I email their contacts back asking them to update their details, I still get a few emails a day for the wrong person!

I'm currently getting spammed by match.com for one of them.
I like this speech.
> Those friends don't talk about it publicly for fear of further retaliation, but given their experiences, what OP wrote doesn't surprise me in the least.

But what is surprising, especially given the prevalence of these anecdotes, is that OP wrote about it. I have the feeling he made the calculation that there isn't much left that Apple can do to them (other than kick them out of their app store, which would probably backfire spectacularly, of course).
And we made our initial goal, too!
Your last sentence is key. As I understand it, there's no real legal precedent for IA which basically copies everything out there on an opt-out basis. I personally am glad they do but one of the ways they get off with it is by treading as lightly as possible, including respecting robots.txt even retroactively.

They're also non-commercial, broad in scope, arguably serve a valuable scholarly function and have other characteristics that have kept them mostly out of legal hot water. But it's unclear to what degree they're legally different from a site that decided to create an archive of all comics, commercial and otherwise, and slap advertising up.
Ironic name. Software removal tool is malicious.
Are you suggesting (and I love the idea) that sleep is a garbage collection cycle and learning efficient methods from CompSci enabled your own brain to more efficiently garbage collect it's own memories?

I love the idea - which book were you reading ?!
Couldn't that be because once abroad, everyone they interact with are on Facebook?
There is a very special fun in learning Rust. It isn't stable in the sense that your code from last week will compile this week. On the other hand, it is currently stable enough that all the major concepts are there and most changes are either syntax or API. So reading up on the changes of last week and some search and replace cover most things. Also, most API changes now are introduced through deprecations. All breaking language changes have an RFC process.

The great thing is to see a language while it is still being shaped. Have something you don't like or something that is incredibly clunky? Get involved! The barrier will never be lower. Backwards compatibility is not a thing yet! If the change makes sense and you can muster the resources for it, there is no one holding you back. Code review for pull requests is also awesome, all of my pull requests were accepted on the second or the third try - but for the better!

On top of that, it is a really interesting language on it's own right with interesting concepts worth learning.
Newegg is now accepting Bitcoin
Sure, you could do that. Personally, I have always had a reply from their abuse department within the hour (usually it's solved by then, too).

But indeed, if you feel you have sufficient evidence that MSFT is downright neglectful and turning a blind eye to spam accounts, feel free to file a motion and post a $200k+ bond.
I believe it's a pun on the "U smart" comment made by one of the VPs.
> only 6 data-points

Eight, seems to me. Agreed on the Excel behaviour.

Also, the blog post states: "ticks on the x-axis are separated by 20, 50, 43, 37, 20, 20, and 22 years."

The first two ticks are 1700 and 1820, so 120 years. (Noticed because stretching the left side is the biggest chart change shown.)
Google, Facebook, monarchy and democracy.
You're still ignoring the fact that this is one sides account of an obviously messy situation.

What happened before he called her a whore? Did she bait him, did she harass him, did she cheat on him, etc etc

My point was when you date someone, there's often blame on both sides when things turn sour.
Do they want a thank you? So sad really because lately they've shown some small steps in what I thought was the right direction. Ignorance is bliss.
Interestingly, from what I read here it seems a lot simpler to set up a tax exempt non-profit in France (Europe?).
Basically you just register the statute of the non-profit (it's inner working), and you can then act as a registered non-profit exempt from many taxes (non-profit meaning you can't share the revenue between the members as if they were shareholders).
The tax administration can control at any point, of course, and ask for taxes if you start doing for-profit or clearly commercial activities that are not covered by the rules.

Then if you want to exempt donations, as in this case, you have to be of general interest (for the common good).

You don't need to apply, You can just self-check against a list of criterias, and emit a fiscal receipt for you donators (but you might have to prove it later).
Or you can ask the tax administration to confirm and declare that you are of general interest.

And then there is another step for more exemptions, for your donators "of public utility" ("d'intérêt public"). This is way harder to get and is granted and published by the government. This is for bigger fondations working on great, wide issues.
How to Get Into Harvard
Seriously, just skim it; it's not boring legalese:

>1. The founders of a red-hot technology startup named Tinder engaged in atrocious sexual harassment and sex discrimination against Whitney Wolfe, the young woman who co- founded Tinder and was the face of Tinder in magazines and in Tinder’s efforts to market the company to other young women. Tinder’s Chief Marketing Officer Justin Mateen repeatedly called Ms. Wolfe a “whore,” including in front of CEO Sean Rad, and he told Ms. Wolfe that he was taking away her “Co-Founder” title because having a young female co-founder “makes the company seem like a joke” and “devalues” the company.

>

>2. Mr. Mateen and Mr. Rad subjected Ms. Wolfe to a barrage of horrendously sexist, racist, and otherwise inappropriate comments, emails and text messages, including describing one person as a “liberal lying desperate slut” and others as “middle age Muslim pigs” and referring, for example, to “fucking” the wife of a prominent blogger, and a text depicting IAC Chairman Barry Diller as a penis. Although it is tempting to describe the conduct of Tinder’s senior executives as “frat-like,” it was in fact much worse- representing the worst of the misogynist, alpha-male stereotype too often associated with technology startups.

>

>3. Although Ms. Wolfe repeatedly complained to CEO Rad, he ignored her complaints, dismissing her as “annoying” and “dramatic,” and threatened her job. Ms. Wolfe finally broke down the night that Mr. Mateen called her a “whore” at a company event, and she offered to resign in consideration for modest severance and the vesting of her stock. Mr. Rad snidely rejected the offer and fired her.
Service objects as a way of testing Rails apps (without factory_girl)
Great project. I'm only about 15% into the book according to my Kindle, but it's interesting enough that I'm definitely going to check out the status of this project when I finish it. (could be a couple of months at the rate I'm going now)

The validity of the numbers depends on more than just the maths though, do you guys plan on going through the sources as well?
> The collective action problem sounds good in theory, but the concept breaks down when you realize that the formation of a government (at least a democracy or republic) is also a collective action.

Formation of a government may have these problems, but it's done once every now and then, and then in between we have stable periods of consensus. Yes, some will disagree with this, and some with that decision, but your solution involves spreading this same mess, akin to government formation, over every single activity where a consensus would be beneficial!
The article fails to follow the logical process to the very end. What isn't being asked is: why are humans using that road when they weren't using the smaller road before?

Humans don't just drive for the sake of doing so. They drive because they have the need to do so. Building roads lowers the perceived time cost of driving, so more people drive, and more people drive at the time that is most desirable to do so. In some cases this results in increased congestion, but if the need of the population is met or exceeded, then the result is smooth traffic flow. Even if the bigger road is more congested, it may still have a greater net traffic flow, and that increased flow results in greater economic and societal good.

For example, because of new highway XYZ, I can now work somewhere that was formerly too far a commute.

The problem isn't solved by building smaller roads, it's solved by building even bigger roads, or building roads in a more optimal fashion (selecting a route for a new road that matches the transportation needs of the population).
The Associated Press automates corporate earnings stories
Getting started scripting with JMeter
Menu Bar icon app to monitor network quality (using ping)
100% agree. I think there are many lawyers posting in this thread ;)

Thanks a lot to the author!!
In that particular case, any proof that the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees has to start from the relevant axioms - and if you include the Euclidean parallel postulate then yes, that can be proved. What would the "crucial context" outside of the axioms you start with and inference steps to get from the axioms to your statement be?
$10,000 TeamSpeak App Developer Contest
If you are interested in developing apps, test you skills in the Overwolf and TeamSpeak app developer contest! Only the best of apps, and the strongest of heart and mind will win from the $10,000 prize pool, including some kick-ass gear from SteelSeries.

Do YOU have what it takes to win, and have your app promoted on the Overwolf website forever? Head over to the official contest page to find out!

http://overwolf.com/teamspeak-developers-contest-2014/

The competition starts today, and ends on August 9th, so get your apps in!

Having trouble thinking of ideas? or maybe you have so many your brain might explode?! Check out our feature request page to see what our users want, or to post your own ideas!

http://feedback.overwolf.com/forums/235154-feature-requests/category/78411-teamspeak
Yes however one company builds a product to sell it or make a profit in some other way while another gives it away for free.

I would argue that the OSS company is still at a disadvantage since they have to figure out how to feed the developers (pay them a decent wage) while still giving the software away for free.
Building a JMS Testing Plan – Apache JMeter
You should try out the Marathon series then (the precursors to Halo from Bungie, sort of set in the same universe). They are available in open source at:

http://marathon.sourceforge.net/
Geometry: Design Rationale
Yudkowsky is more of an expert in reasoning than in Physics. For example, imagine you are a world class expert in Quantum Mechanics and you are asked to give a talk at a science club. You cover a lot of stuff and think "that was great". But somebody else tells you "that was terrible, you mumbled, you wrote illegible stuff on the board etc." and you realise it wasn't about QM, it was about public speaking.

Similarly physicists have done amazing work over the decades, and now it's time to draw conclusions from all that evidence. But it turns out that physicists are not domain experts in drawing conclusions from evidence. That kind of skill is a separate domain in its own right.
Apple's job isn't to help build the next Facebook app. It is to build the best ecosystem they can. And that doesn't come from (a) having less exclusives or (b) having apps that don't take advantage of the unique features of the platform.

It's similar to Nintendo. They don't really benefit from having the next generic COD game on their platform. They benefit from having a game that makes the most innovative use of the touch screen control.
Or, you could just run your computers wall display clock on UT1, which is effectively UTC with the leap seconds "smeared" over half a year. The deviation from the UT1 second to the UTC second is less than the precision most computer's clocks.
I was unable to figure out one key thing about this article. Are they claiming that if the droplet is observed while going through one of the slits that the interference pattern will vanish? If not can we really claim a strong analogy with QM?
Millions of tons of ocean plastic has gone missing
I'd not come across this before. It's just like something out of a Neal Stephenson or William Gibson novel.