skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The big bang hypothesis could be stated (in a simplified way) by stating that the universe was once a lot more hot and dense than it is today. Using General Relativity, we can model the expansion of the universe. When we do the math, we find that out come correctly the relative abundance of light elements in the early universe as well as the spectrum for the cosmic microwave background, and many other quantities. It holds very well together.

If we extrapolate far enough back, we reach a point where the predicted density would be infinite. We call that point the beginning of time (or the big bang). This "prediction" of an infinite density is taken as a sign that our model breaks down at (or before) this point (by "before" I mean when we extrapolate backwards in time towards the infinite density time...).

So, it works extremely well for a time when the density was extremely large (but not infinite) until today. We just don't have enough information to know what would happen when densities larger than a certain value so as to make meaningful predictions.

To make a completely silly analogy: it would be like predicting the motion of a rocket aimed for a comet. Our knowledge of celestial mechanics is good enough to predict the trajectory up until the rocket "touches" the comet. We just do not have enough information about the comet composition to know if the rocket will just blow it apart or if it is the rocket itself that will splatter on the comet, or whatever.
I haven't read it but I've heard great things about it. I've read his translation of the Quran though...he was a gifted writer and scholar. What a luminary! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Asad
Anonymous Names Innocent Man As Michael Brown’s Killer, Police Say
> The Democrats are never going to be okay with removing federal programs (even if basic income could cover several of them), and the Republicans won't touch something that would be seen by many as socialism.

If the general public supports it strongly enough, then the entrenched political parties will either conform to the public demands or face a realignment which replaces them with political parties that do.

While the US electoral system is structured in a way that duopoly at any given time is essentially guaranteed, it does not guarantee that today's major parties will be tomorrow's. The US has for almost its entire history had two major parties, but major parties have failed several times.
> Person A works long hard hours to achieve something.
> Person B does not. Person A subsidizes person B.

I'll leave aside whether there's a direct coorelation between hard work and income... Your example presumes that Person A has the opportunity to do hard work in exchange for a financial reward. The worry is that there's no work for Person A at all, because there's not enough consumer demand to employ him, because nobody else has a job either, because the few people who do have money are quite comfortable with what they have already and don't spend enough to keep many employed.
Right now, if high net worth individuals pay insurance at all (it's usually an employer provided benefit), it's pre-tax and even the best cadillac plans for the entire family are ~2k/mo. A 10 percent increase in income tax would rankle anybody making over ~150k/yr, and that's assuming the best whole family plans. Someone like myself who pays under 400/mo for really good insurance would get dinged on a 10 percent tax increase at only $50k/yr.

Single payer would have to come in at about a 5-7 percent tax increase for it to be even remotely palatable to me, and that's as someone who's all for it and think it's morally bankrupt that we don't have it.
Is anyone saying this is the "best"? I'd put it down to "most easily hacked together under time pressure".
I assume when doing active probes, you'd want to match the fingerprint of the most common tool for plausible deniability. I also highly suspect that this predates open source alternatives like masscan and zmap.

Performance isn't a concern because they are using lots of other peoples infrastructure.
It is, you just have to buy an Oracle Premier Support License for your machine(s) and switch them from Red Hat to Oracle Linux (which requires switching yum repos, removing some packages, and installing a few others), but does not require a reboot - which means you can keep using the official Red Hat kernel (until you do reboot).

Disclaimer: I work there.
> "Find and fix security bugs in software component X" is about as specific as "add a spell checker in software component X" and can be treated just the same. You break down the task into smaller components until you can visualize the code needed and then you write it. "Audit software component X for security risk A" is something a competent security researcher can be tasked to do and get results for.

Thank you - indeed that is all of Agile and project management in one paragraph. Very well put
I'm surprised at all the approval of this politeness strategy given my modus operandi -- making sure I'm doing interesting-enough things to have a comfortable influx of people, then filter through them by being upfront and asking hard but honest questions.

I don't think we realistically can connect with everyone on a meaningful level, and given there's 7-8 billion people out there, a search/filter strategy just seems more reasonable than trying to please everyone.

That being said, I am not advocating to the burning of any bridges at all -- as the scenes we walk tend to get smaller and smaller the more focused and specialized they get.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be (probably) better if they did release it but that the fact that they do not isn't surprising.
Repaying negative status debts does not necessarily improve one's credit score. You can ask the credit reporting agencies to reflect the fact that you've paid it, but this is a no-op for virtually everything except mortgage applications.
Just curious, which debt collection software do you work on?
BARCLAYS: The iPhone 6 And iWatch Will Be Vital To Apple's Big 'Data Play'
Conversely, the well-audited OpenBSD kernel has had next to none of these problems precisely because they pay attention to correctness, even with the "fatigued and rusty scrap iron" that is the C language.
Well that might be a bias based on the Catholic interpretation of scripture? For instance, in the church I was raised in you literally could not offend someone by attempting to take communion and being obviously not of their church. It was part of their creed. And I've had the pleasure of praying in a mosque when it was outright declared before hand that I was not Muslim.

Now that said, I'd buy you could easily offend someones religious sensabilities by praying an incorrect way, but you can also easily offend someone by not praying at all...
The role of a second parliamentary chamber is hotly debated across the West at the moment.

Countries where both houses are elected and enjoy equivalent powers (like Italy or the US) complain that this arrangement slows down lawmaking, in an age where everything else is actually speeding up.

Countries where the second chamber is not elected, like Britain, experience a certain unease: they wage war oversea "to bring democracy", and then half of their lawmaking is in the hands of a completely undemocratic body with dubious legitimacy.

Countries where the second chamber actually represents different bodies from the electorate (like Germany) seem to have found a pragmatic third way, but then this chamber ends up over-representing certain interests (in Germany, local ruling classes and their nests of semi-private special businesses), which again is not really democratic in nature.

I think we'll have to learn again why balance is required in matters of such importance, and we'll probably have to learn it the hard way. The major supporters of "streamlined" government have always been tyrants and oligarchs, after all.
I was on the edge of my seat waiting for them to get to the point and I still am. Sounds like a handful of socialists belly aching about something they don't understand but feel is unfair.
Robust manufacturing output buoys U.S. economic outlook
Right. There were at least half a dozen other apps in the App Store doing the exact same thing that launched before Oink. It's been a couple years since I've thought about this space, at all, but some of the others were:

* Stamped: http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/26/stamped/

* Chewsy: http://chewsy.com

* Foodspotting: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/foodspotting/id350727118?mt=...

* Ness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ness_Computing
Good question for which I don't have answers. Bill Gates maybe?

I am not a fan in general of idolizing people.

It would have to be someone who was laudable as a whole person and not just professionally. Someone who can keep a marriage together and doesn't produce large broods of offspring just to outsource their care and feeding to nannies. These are my own personal biases and judgment: family and the people around you should come first.
Occupational changes during the 20th century (2006) [pdf]
I would recommend having bot names be case sensitive, as well as a limit on how many a user can register. I really like the first use UX, and how easy it is to get started, but you can register as many names as you want.
Rise in sea level can't be stopped: scientists
> a different sort of shock in the private sector as well

Deadlines, deadlines, deadlines?
That's not the argument - a skyscraper made out of fatigued and rusty iron would fall over before it could open. However a skyscraper that was not upto spec, no fire escapes, perhaps cutting back on the sprinkler system, maybe not putting in carpets, now that is more likely.

We have market forces that prevent people selling clearly defective skyscrapers. But we need regulators and investigators paid for out of the public purse to ensure the defects that are not obvious are found.

What we lacked here is a form of certification that the code was good enough. Or perhaps, we just lacked a form of certification that enough (qualified) eyeballs were looking at the code.
Here is something you might not understand or know. Nowadays your credit score affects more than you realize. It used in many places as a measure of trustworthiness. You can have trouble renting an apartment (depending on the market and landlord) with debt that went to collection. Also you pay more in insurance premiums. Your potential employer may pull your credit report as part of a background check and decide not to hire you because you didn't feel like paying your debt. Just forget about getting a security clearance with debt in collections.

Information does eventually age out of your credit report.
They say we can't get smaller than an atom, but electrons are smaller than an atom, and we don't even have to use just the charge but can also use properties like spin and momentum to get more values out of them. I.e. spintronics. Then of course there are photons as well. The article mentions itself that we use light for etching features even less than the wavelength of the light nowadays. Sometimes you need a big read-write head or something, but then you can just push magnetic domains past it on a wire, etc. so that isn't necessarily the size of piece of computation in the device if we move beyond transistors.
Are you asking for an explanation of HTML entities, or a listing of HTML entities that browsers recognize, or some third thing I cannot imagine?

Also, now that (new) Web pages are nearly all UTF-8 encoded, HTML entities are no longer used, sometimes even deprecated in favor of Unicode plain-text. The advantages are smaller size, easier editing, and a solution to the question about which browsers support which entities.

> But I think it's even more stupid spending more than 2 minutes trying to find out how to do a search.

So you think it should be someone else's two minutes? But seriously, ask yourself if you should even be considering using entities in 2014. Doesn't your HTML development environment support UTF-8?
> libertarians would be (and are) completely opposed to basic income!

Many libertarians are not.

> Basic income is basically a monetary redistribution

OTOH, for many libertarians, its a more liberty-preserving one than means-tested welfare programs that it would replace.

> which aligns more with socialism than anything else.

While in the US, libertarianism is often associated with right libertarianism, and socialism is often associated with Soviet-style communism and other authoritarianisms, libertarian socialism is a real thing.
Salient point:

The target is presented with a dialogue to upgrade their
flash installation [via ISP-based MITM - DenisM].
If this upgrade is accepted the malicious SWF enables the
installation of a ‘scout agent’ which provides target
validation.
Things will drastically change. But given piece of technology has its limits. Assuming it does not is like expecting horses to run faster than sound some time ago.
Ask HN: Seeking freelancer
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8120079

I want to add a SEEKING FREELANCER but somewhat I can not add? I don't see the comment field?

Anyway, I am looking for a freelancer with marketing expertise.

Candidate must be familiar with social media marketing, analytics, and ability to deliver results.

if results are excellent, there is possibility to be elevated to founder status.

Please email at guest666666666@gmail.com

Thanks.
> Effectively banned from the site

The TED organization decides which talks are worth "featuring". The two "banned" talks are actually far MORE prominent than all the talks they decide to simply not feature at all. TED is still hosting them, merely on a different page where they encourage discussion of the issues raised. You can easily find that page and engage the discussion there if you like.

> Sorry but the scientific community needs to address a number of points that are raised.

Does it? Says who? More to the point, does TED need to address those points, or is it okay for TED to say "no, this is just silly" until there's an actual there there in the form of, say, replicable results?

I would be careful to distinguish results that merely aren't explained by science from those that can't be. If they really can't be explained by "science", what's the point in addressing them? Why bother? That the earth was round could be explained by science. Did you mean to say instead that these points "run counter to conventional wisdom"?

If you think you have a case to make, why not just make it? What SPECIFIC "points" do you think he raises that "need to be addressed"?

Are you willing to support his views on, say, telepathy - including dog telepathy? Do you think his "ten dogmas" accurately reflect what scientific types believe? Some seemed pretty strawmannish to me. (It's easy to make yourself seem insightful if you are allowed to invent and caricature imaginary opposing views that you can then rail against.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake
Mostly because, this particular petition seems like the worst sort of political polly-anna-ism. That is, it shows a lack of political, constitutional and tactical understanding of how the US works. A much more effective solution seems to be local action in this case. If you could get a couple of big city police departments to install cameras the domino effect would be tremendous and local action will be the easier route!
I came across this limitation within minutes of playing with pg. I couldn't believe that such a powerful tool would be missing something so basic.
I think you're having a different problem, actually -- the OP was having trouble with the GitHub integration. Send me an email at support@omniref with the same information, and I'll look into it.

This is the first wider release of the extensions, so I'm not surprised there are a few bugs. Thanks for bearing with us while we fix them!
At that rate, why didn't the creditor try sell the debt to the debtor? Effectively saying "you pay me 1/1200th, then your debt is owed to yourself and you can call it quits."
> Why is that aspect very controversial?

Because people are often afraid enough of the "wrong people" getting things they don't deserve that they are willing to accept the right people not getting things they do deserve to prevent it. ("deserve" here being relative to the value system of the person whose opinion is at issue, to be clear.)
> If you don't water you lawn, you're fined. If you do, you're fined.

And a state law trumps a Homeowner's Association (it's normally even written into the contract). The Association is liable for attempting to enforce something that violates state law.

> And here's an example of a guy going to jail for having a rainwater pool on their property

Um, IIRC, the details of that case are that the dude actually build enormous reservoirs. We're not talking a couple barrels, we're talking something like 3 ponds.
I've never gotten a bill from a hospital that didn't include the adjusted amount from the insurance companies. The crazy original charges from the hospitals are usually as high as they are because the insurance companies ALWAYS negotiate them down, even with these discounts the bills are still crazy expensive, it ended up costing $2,500 for my wife to have a Cesarian when my daughter was born after insurance paid.
Why would you do that instead of just keeping everything in a notes.txt?
>"'no true scotsman' fallacies don't really help your "argument"."
I'm afraid you're going to have to elaborate on this one. Perhaps if you elucidated your point, I'd be able to rebut it.
"There will absolutely be people who abuse the system and use this money to not cover their required expenses and use it for a variety of things they don't need. At the end of the month if they don't have any money left how will they cover their necessary expenses?"

If someone is provided the resources they need, and still cannot make their life function, they need some kind of help other than "more resources." Being more able to identify these individuals and provided more targeted assistance is actually one of the positive things about a BI program.
This article that sparked the response is phenomenal:

"Working anything but 9-5" - http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/starbucks-w...

A lot of the problems she is dealing with are things I have never experienced and likely never will. The things she is facing on a regular basis are personal nightmares of mine. Imagine if your life story started out "drug addicted mother and an absent father," what a disadvantage that is. Certainly worth a read.
That's excellent and very relevant.

"Kelso claimed that in a truly free market wages would tend to fall over time, with all the benefits of technological progress accruing to capital owners"
“Brilliance,” “Pride” and “Genius”: How Tech Culture Hides Mental Illness
No, you can start by investing $100.
LA is the cultural capital. As depressing as it may be, world culture is now Hollywood culture; Los Angeles has far more impact on the culture of far-away places than either San Francisco, New York, or London.
> how is that any different from any country in the world?

Well, other countries at least try to maintain the idea that democratic power comes from the electorate, rather than special interests. So corruption, where it is, has to pass through the electorate (which it often does, but that's another matter). Whereas in Britain, the City is an institutional body openly and directly representing business and "free trade" in Parliament and elsewhere.

This arrangement is closer to what Mussolini implemented in Italy, based on the idea that Parliament should be a zone of mediation between competing private interests, rather than a body dedicated to represent and discover the Will of the People as a whole (which is the traditional French model).
We've been thinking about other ways to do it (e.g. restricting via bloom filter), but ultimately, there's so much content on Omniref that we're going to match most queries for something.

It's disabled for incognito mode, and the query data is used only to hit our search index. If this is still an issue for you, we can put a setting in to allow disabling of this feature for privacy.
The US government already pays more per capita for health care than Canada, despite not covering anywhere close to everybody. If one could wave a magic wand and transmute the US to the Canadian system, US government health care expenditures would actually fall, and taxed could be lowered.
> If police-cams are mandated the footage should be put into a case file and only released under court order.

Because if there's one thing we can trust the government with, it's our private data!
The city I live in has a large population of UK citizens and isn't part of the EU either, is there something I should know?
I really like the broad coverage that articles like this give to the psychology of learning, but I wonder how important some of these principles are in a practical sense. Sure, the effect of studying and retrieving in the same context is a classic effect, but how strong is it?

It's like reading an article on how to make money that doesn't even give you a ballpark estimate of how much money each strategy could make you.
Internet is a basic human right
Right. A good solution would be a bloom filter that ships in the extension of relevant terms.
They have something called small claims court for getting a judgement on small debts. Cheap and easy, no lawyer required. I am betting there are collection agencies that specialize in small debts.
I see you're trying to support quasi-quoting and regular quoting in the same construct: the "quoted expression".

I'm afraid that this will fail; sufficiently complex situations involving nested quasi-quotes will force you to confront the reality that you need separate quote and quasi-quote expressions.

The essence of the matter is that if quote is also quasiquote, you have ambiguities like:

'(a b c '(,d))

The machine has to decide that the comma belongs to one of the two quotes. That decision could sometimes be opposite to programmer intent. Which of these did the programmer really mean?

`(a b c '(,d))
'(a b c `(,d))

Or using Awl syntax, suppose d contains 42:

{a b c {\d}}

When we evaluate this, is the d interpolated in the current evaluation round so that the result is

{a b c {42}}

Or is it protected from evaluation so that the result is

{a b c {\d}}

The issue isn't which one is right, but not being able to express either choice.

You might think that a viable strategy for awl Awl would be to always associate (uncompounded) unquotes with the inner-most Q-expr, and when the programmer wants that to belong to an outer Q-expr, the programmer can instead use embedded S-exprs as "true" quotes, like this:

{a b c {\d}} -> {a b c {\d}}
{a b c (\d)} -> {a b c (42)}

But then what if I want neither of the above results, but actually this object:

{a b c {42}}

I.e. I want the outer quasiquote to write the inner one.

I tried, in a Lisp dialect, unifying quotes and quasiquotes and was ultimately forced to confront the reality that it cannot work, and painfully backed out of the change. It was okay for very simple uses, but the crippled expressivity spoiled the quasiquote for serious macro programming.