skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Big business is subject to federal mafia clan wars.

This can be summarized with one word "corruption". Corruption that is deep, toxic, and permeates every sphere of life. From small things like getting a passport or drivers' license. What kind of grades kids will get in kindergarten, to large things like the government appropriating and stealing billion dollar companies.

Corruption becomes a way of life and it spreads like a disease.

It is hard to describe how it feels. You know as corrupt as US is, one can at least have a little hope that the judicial system will work. At the end of the day if someone commits murder and they are caught, you know there will probably be a good trial. In these countries (at least where I am from), one can commit murder and then there is a price you pay to the prosecutor, police, judge to make it "go way".

If you start a business, and are very successful you might pop on the radar of the local mafia, who has members in the local government. They will ensure that your business has not "paid all the taxes" or that your immigration paperwork "was not in order" and kick you out of the country and take your business.

Going through life you see this. Colleagues in school who fail everything and don't do work are getting top grades in a final exam. You try to pass a drivers' exam and you are getting deliberately failed with hints that a bribe is necessary for you to pass and so on. That is very stressful and it something I am not used do and don't want to be used to. Others, on the contrary, thrive and prosper in that environment.
I only wish it were 50% hacking! I miss the lively discussions of programming topics that are more than Go's and Rust's latest features. (Not that I mind those discussions at all.)
I always thought he meant "One small step for man" as in modern man, "one giant leap for mankind" as in man as a species overall.
Listen to the sound made Sounds made by hooking malloc and re-compiling itself
Tell that to someone with clinical depression.
Given that the article headline maps correctly to the content, you were not deceived into clicking on it.
Jean Guillon, Author at Business 2 Community
GTLD.club | Articles and short posts about new generic Top-Level Domains
You mean the poor Chinese migrant worker who is making $250K a year? Oh, and he can buy a house in some places for around $500-750K (assume east bay somewhere), which is way cheaper than Shanghai/Beijing.

California is definitely desirable in terms of climate, quality of life, and job opportunities (if in tech); whether you can afford to live there is another matter.
also see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902
I honestly don't know how to feel about this. It's really just as deceptive in presenting a clear cut and linear case about the other side, as if geopolitics really are this straightforward, and not actually a cryptic clusterfuck. It's just as pandering as Russian propaganda, or any form of propaganda.

That and, for what it's worth, I can see there being just as big of an incentive for Ukraine, as for Russia, to take down MH17. In fact, I found the immediate pinpointing of the blame on Russia to be strange. If they were the perpetrators, then they shot themselves in the foot. It's just a baffling and asinine strategic decision.
And that the future was GC
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but you are saying a person would die without the internet?
I am speaking from my own experience.

My boss left as a result of corporate incompetence (not his, the company). I will not go into that, but as a very senior and generally well liked person in a very large company, with the ability to bring a lot of work in (100s of jobs per year, approaching 1000s), these were big shoes to fill. He was the greatest manager I'd ever had. He didn't manage, he led.

His role was filled by someone quite new to the organisation. I hated it for months, but 1.5 years later, I liked him a lot.

He needed to show his boss that he could fill the shoes. That meant exceeding expectations. New, out-larged goals, visible checklists for what should be done, regular follow-ups.

But after a few months I realised his vulnerability in still feeling vulnerable. We didn't chat explicitly, and in retrospect we should have, but on a particularly difficult challenge that all thought impossible, we were achieved a big result, and bonded on that.

This was a management role where it easy to hire 'workers' but painfully hard to find people with requisite domain knowledge and demonstrable management experience, in a location it was very hard to get people to relocate (internally) to. If the salary offers you're seeing are higher, it is likely you are in an equally illiquid market. I also never explicitly asked for a raise, but after some time and trust had developed he bumped me up quite a bit.

It may be the case that the new incumbent in the role feels they do not have control. Let them feel they have control: document your work, stick to deadlines, and see each other face-to-face to discuss. They could well feel more vulnerable than you do now, despite a position of authority. Make it a partnership.
> I have heard of Apple sitting on a ton of cash, but presumably it is not literally just sitting in the bank.

It's literally sitting on their balance sheet, and, consequently, even a bank can't actually use it for investments. It's really bad.

> I think that if your point were true for the economy overall, the economy would not be growing and it would not be possible to get greater-than-inflation returns from the stock market overall.

Stock market returns are not particularly connected to the economy in any useful way anymore (stocks are more vehicles for speculation than real ownership of a company). I wouldn't use it as a proxy.

A better proxy would be auto traffic numbers. In California, CalTrans traffic engineers were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements about traffic numbers because they were so horrifically down during the bust.

The economy is growing some, but slowly. The fact that California managed to balance a budget and quit cutting helps. An extra million people with health insurance helps twofold--more people in healthcare professions and better productivity from people at the bottom of the ladder. Gradual minimum wage increases will help get people buried at the bottom of the ladder a little.

The very interesting question to me is whether the ACA will unleash small businesses. A LOT of people in their 40s and 50s stayed buried in jobs they hated simply because they were terrified that they couldn't get health insurance if they left. Those people are now free to move--I think this is going to be THE legacy of the ACA.
Android L to Add Granular Permissions Prompts
Yes, but neither is it fair that because you serendipitously gain productivity from this website, to assume the function of it is to be productive or expect submissions to meet some standard of productivity. I think completely trivial submissions have a place here too.
You rename the prisons "treatment centers" and treat drug abuse as a medical problem. Then you just have people committed instead of prosecuted.
Ok, now how does this compare with Goodman and Tenenbaum's work on hierarchical Bayesian inference?
There is a massive amount of secondary evidence, all of which points in the same direction. Here is few research resources, unfortunately they are all in russian; perhaps google translate will recover enough meaning for it to be useful:

http://www.solonin.org/article_sbityiy-boing-medlenno-i-po
http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/code/1362312-echo/
http://gordonua.com/publications/Belkovskiy-Vse-plany-Putina...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiZ43EunqvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ludDRApl7nU
>people only get better off when net production expands

This is a trivially false statement. Just look at any recession in history and you can easily find people who become better off even though net production shrank.
It wasn't proved, but there is not a believable alternative scenario.

There are videos of transported missiles, intercepted calls, orders of obstructing access to crash site... John Kerry even says there is "Enormous amount of evidence" for that scenario. Still not 100% sure, but 99% yes.
My experience - having worked at both Google and in the startup scene - is that young PMs at Google/Microsoft actually get to work on much bigger problems and have a much better understanding of the macro scene than startup founders. At Google, it's not uncommon to hear "Can't we just buy [famous startup X]?" or "Figure out the benefit for users, and if it turns out to be useful for a large number of people, we'll see if the lawyers and lobbyists can get the law changed" or "We'll just throw 65,000 machines at the problem." As a result, there's a presumption that problems are solvable if we just think really hard and identify the incentives of everybody in the system. Few startups have this privilege.

Where Google really falls down compared to a startup is in micro-level thinking. A PM at Google may understand how a hundred million users behave in the aggregate, but fail to understand how to change one user's behavior. When your sole work experience is at a powerful corporation, you start assuming that people will take your phone calls, and you don't develop the skills of how to cold-call an ambivalent prospect, or how to empathize with a minority user who is really frustrated, or how to focus and prioritize on only the tasks that you can make a real impact on.

For engineers, I'd say Google (and presumably Microsoft) engineers understand far better than a startup why simplicity is important. The codebase, after all, is orders of magnitude bigger and harder to understand. And iterations and tests are common practice as well. What a Google engineer does not know is how to stare at a blank editor window and, in the next 3-4 hours, get something cool up on the screen. They don't know how to duct-tape open source components together into a working, if imperfect, system.
I have followed the progress of Hawkins and Numenta to an extent. The videos (the Google and sitkack's video) still have the same theme - it's all about prediction and pattern recognition in the simplistic sense.

What missing from this? Off the top of my head:

* Language,

* Goal-oriented interaction with the environment

* General purpose reasoning - things generating novel behaviors based on observations of the environment. Especially, dealing with multiple interacting constrai
nts on an ad-hoc basis and deciding which is most important.

And I'm not arguing for human behavior being all rational deduction - pattern recognition and such are a huge part of human behavior but all the ways humans or even animals can change their behavior are where biological intelligence really goes past current versions of computer intelligence. The thing with Jeff's talk is that it may well be that the bulks of raw brain activity is focused on just processing raw streams of data. The truth of this doesn't mean this is the thing that makes the brain seem intelligent in a different fashion from a video camera.
Last I heard, most close-knit tribal communities are actually more-or-less monogamous. The main binding structure is the extended family, not extended sexual networks.
The problem is, it wasn't intentional. They seem to have thought they were attacking a Ukrainian military plane. There wasn't any strategy in this.
This is not a serious article. It is a rant.

"The population at large is, statistically speaking, not very bright. Many are deranged from overuse of alcohol or drugs."
Thousands Of Containers Fall Off Ships Every Year. What Happens To Them?
I once had a recruiter send me over a job spec asking for experience with ActionScript 4. This was back in about 2009, when Flash and ActionScript were still relevant, and ActionScript 3 was the current (and last) version of the language. When I quizzed the recruiter about this, and sent him a Wikipedia link, he told me that was what he'd been given in an email by his client and that he was furious with them for making him look like a fool. See, they're not all bad (or perhaps he just told me what I wanted to hear...).
God, I wish that were true. HN has always had a heavily disproportionate stock of articles about/relevant to startups, a tiny subset of hackerdom, because Y-Combinator. Less businessgab would be awesome. The "miscellaneous other stuff" can stay as long as it's either interesting tech, political news relevant to the interests of the internet and the people who maintain it, or general smart-people stuff.
From what I've seen on Linux, TrueCrypt is run as root. The two other ways it could do mounting are:

1) Use FUSE's ability to (as a non-root user) mount user-readable devices in a user-owned directory.

2) Do as Docker does and talk to over a socket to a daemon running as root.

From what I've seen the official TrueCrypt software does neither of these things. What video are you talking about? Perhaps I missed something?

On Windows, it's not uncommon for an unprivileged process to talk to a root-equivalent Service to perform privileged operations.
> I didnt check other airlines

Perhaps I can point you to the link in the comment to which you've replied which plots the courses of flights of Malaysian and other airlines from the past weeks so that you can check?!
Fallacies apply to statements about the truth or falsehood of something, not to criticism in general. They did not say that the book was untrue in any way due to that, but rather that they disliked that aspect of the book.
It is right there, and the author is confused. Not everyone cares about "credit", and if you're 100 person start up exits for 4-5x what you've raised to date, its a good day for all the employees.

The "hollywood" people as I call them, the people who want their name in the credits, are not the people you want to aspire to be. Its the people who everyone who has worked with knows they are the 'real deal.' When I did interviews at Google one of my goals was to separate out the people whose mission in life was "to work at Google" from the people whose mission was to do "<some thing>." The former are the 'star struck' ones, the latter are there to do something useful.

When you are in a successful start up, it becomes a bigger company, the people who were there with you and helped build it all know who did good and who didn't. There is no reason at all to be mentioned in Tech Crunch, it adds no value to get 'credit.'
Oh, come on! John Kerry says... right...
It is somewhat worse than just corruption. A mafia is esger to make positive harm by killing/injuring/damaging property/kidnapping... whereas corruption may just be a "hindrance". You risk your life or property if you fight a mafia, unlike fighting corruption.
Although it is true that the bad extreme of corruption is a mafia.
A lot of potential investment is parked in sovereign debt right now. The Treasury has no trouble selling debt at essentially zero interest.

There's plenty of supply out there, but not enough demand.
P.S.

No harm in circulating your CV around headhunters to learn your general market worth.
If you go Python, you could start here: http://nbviewer.ipython.org/github/ptwobrussell/Mining-the-S...
I Will Not Support Y Combinator in Israel
Yes it is a rant and at some points quite exaggerated but usually there are only rants against mafias, not statistics.
James Garner changed what a hero could be like
videos of transported missiles, intercepted calls, orders of obstructing access to crash site...

But do they specifically incriminate one side?
"Giant collectives like governments and corporations cannot feel loyalty to you. Only individual people can do that."

That is true to an large degree, but I think it over-simplifies things sligtly. Giant collectives like governments and corporations, and small collectives like startups, can still have a "culture" (for want of a better word). They have an institutional way of doing things, and they tend to hire people who fit that culture, who think in the same way, and hold the same values, as the people who are already there.

In government, until sometime around the '80s, there was a strong culture of loyalty that went back a long, long time. Possibly to near the start of the 20th century, maybe further. In corporations, it was there too. It might have started dissolving in the '70s, and may not have gone further back than the '40s (although, e.g. IBM's may also go back to the '20s or '30s) but it was there for decades.

Further, these organisational cultures were small-c conservative, eschewing change without good reason, and promoting people who thought likewise. Who would, in turn, do the same.

And so you really could have a reasonable idea of the type of person who would be running the show 40 years from now. In fact, given a culture of loyalty and conservatism, you might even be able to tell who will be holding the power 40 years from now. It's 25-year-old Dave in the next office, who seems just that little bit more organised, that little bit more dependable, that little bit more of a "fit" than you and the people around you.

Whether people were better off or not back then isn't something I want to get into, but even though the culture of loyalty is long gone now, it was a real tangible thing for decades, which is why it still echoes today.

For instance, the lessons we learn from our parents stick with us. If they told us that jobs are for life, there will be some part of us that wants to believe that our current job is more secure than it might actually be.

And so, for many people (well, many people over 30) it's an idea we have to consciously remind ourselves to ignore.
Like there was Chemical WMD in Iraq.
Most people will probably say the key difference is that the US incident was a mistaken attempt to defend an imminent attack, rather than a terrorist attack. Being perhaps more cynical, I would say the key difference is that Russia is not the biggest kid on the playground.
I find the idea of working a 9-5 every day an unacceptable sacrifice, it's doesn't seem like a false dichotomy to me.
The rebels posted on twitter that they shot down a Ukraine military airplane around the same time as when MH17 was shot down. Yet no Ukraine airplane was shot down. The tweet was later deleted but can be found on web.archive.org.
I may yet be disappointed but expect Apple to Open Source it after release as they normally do with their LLVM/Clang changes.

It is still in Beta and still in flux at the moment (language not just implementation).
Apollo 11 transcript starting 04 06 45 04 on Spacelog
Who are you? Durov its you?:)
I would be shocked if the cost-per-phone system was less than $250k/phone, with all costs amortized over the project (Design, Delivery, Installation, Support)
> There is no such thing as a "shortage of demand." It's a nonsensical idea.

Eppur si muove. The predictions of demand-side economic models have been largely correct since the 2008 crisis; the predictions of supply-side models have been outrageously wrong.
If I work hard, it's most often because I enjoy my work; not as a means to an end.
What I'd really appreciate is ideas on how to learn or review the core math concepts. I haven't actually done any multivariable calculus, vector/matrix calculus, or linear algebra in years, even though I took them in undergrad.
Recent news confirm this. >> Pavel Durov the former CEO of Russia's main social network, VKontakte and founder of Telegram quit his job at the beginning of this month saying, "it has become increasingly complicated to stick to the principles we once founded our social site upon.” Speculators gave an educated guess that Russian authorities have been pushing for more and more censorship on the site. Two days later, he apparently "unresigned," but that wasn't the end of this story. >>
http://arcticstartup.com/2014/04/25/lithuania-pavel-druov
Sorry, we are not a good fit. Good luck with your search. /s
This article isn't actually about the shooting down of any flights. It's about the more general way the Russian government operates. Maybe it would have been a better article had it not mentioned any flights, lest the conversation be derailed by debate over the causes & outcomes of the recent tragedy.
There are good reasons to want the general public to see their tax bills and be aware of the precise costs and the reasons for them.

But I can't see why we shouldn't let the government do the paperwork first and then send it to us to sanity check.
... and yet it is a quite accurate portrayal of the current situation in Russia. I should know - I'm Polish and my country was annexed by Russia on several occasions.

I would add that the western EU countries seem to have learned nothing from history. Trying to appease a country with ambitions to become an empire, that annexes neighboring countries -- let's see, haven't we seen that before?
Summing all the evidence, I would say this was a mistake shot down too.
Seems like the stereotype of the self hating Jew now has its counterpart in the self hating Russian.

While all deaths are deplorable being a world power means killing people you disagree with. And unlike the US of to a small but quickly growing extent China Russia lacks the geopolitical power to change the rules of the game.
You're right. Some of these submissions are just sad, linkbaity nonsense. I'm going to head over to /newest and see what little I can do to improve things.

EDIT: There was some interesting stuff on /newest. I just wish I could do a bit more than push them from 1 to 2.

I'd much rather read more things like http://theaviationist.com/2014/07/21/su-27s-escorted-mh17/
or http://keccak.noekeon.org/
For a country to officially start condemning or placing blame on Russia there would have to be irrefutable evidence I'd say. I wouldn't want to get into a seriously heated conflict without being 100% sure, so even 99% wouldn't be good enough if I were in the driver seat. Result being people all standing around, shifty-eyed, 99% sure Russia and the separatists are behind the shooting, no one dares throw the first punch with 99% certainty.
He's mostly right, although I'd correct a few important things:

* Putin's approval is now at 86+%, an all-time high,

* and it's universal across socio-economic classes. A lot of young bright facebook-equipped software engineers are Putin's fans.

* even a lot of first-generation Russians in US absolutely love Putin, for the sense of belonging to a great empire which he gave them (finally someone stood up to evil America!)

* because of the above, any dissenter is basically a pariah

Just keep that in mind.
Its not 3% more on million+ earners either. If you make 2m, the second million is taxed 3% more than the first million.

Also during times of economic hardships, companies are much less likely to invest (they still will, but be more conservative than if times were good) which in my opinion, it falls to the government to !make up this gap, and they need money to do that. So that means they need to tax more, but hopefully readjust taxes down (slightly, big tax drops in the past have caused more problems) but that usually doesn't happen.

TL;DR we need a happy sweet spot, we are below that currently.
> At the end of the day if someone commits murder and they are caught, you know there will probably be a good trial.

I won't claim to have done anywhere near enough research to know either way, but I have heard and read a lot of supposedly educated people say that trials now are extremely rare, primarily due to plea bargaining. I personally think that plea bargaining is a terrible idea in our current legal system.

http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2009/03/burns...