skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Looks cool! Simple to say the least, which is not easy to do!

But I'm worried about something. The credit card input on the payment page shows a lock even though the form is NOT submitted over HTTPS... that makes it look like you're blatantly lying to your customers. Am I missing something?

EDIT: I was missing something. While the HN post links to the HTTPS version, I somehow ended up on a non HTTPS version of the site at some point. Which seems to allow sending CC information over a non encrypted form.
It looks like it was published in 2012, but the author hasn't updated its arXiv metadata: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570866711...
Well if it was always there when you were growing up and your dad wasn't scared of it and he didn't talk about how strange it was, who would teach you to think it's anything out of the ordinary?
Craigslist is definitely the way to go. There's a section specifically for temporary housing. http://newyork.craigslist.org/sub/

With the price range you mentioned earlier, you can likely afford a room in one of the more desirable neighborhoods.
Tried that years ago. Gets in a loop.
That and it's worth noting that TPB doesn't actually host any pirated content. It only provides magnet links.
> This article is junk science. The author opens by suggesting that Russians have discovered and use a different set of chemical elements than the ones we use in the United States, going so far as to suggest that one of them is a room temperature superconductor in ways that American scientists are uninterested in.

Either I completely failed to see sarcasm in your comment, or you completely failed in Reading Comprehention 101. If it's not the former, please re-read the article carefully before criticizing things author is not saying.
Show HN: Whistleblower – Whistle-Activated WebAudio Game
Do you really think America needs more psychoactive drugs?
You're right that the solution shouldn't be automatic US approval for any drug used in Russia. It's reasonable to have standards for drug testing and require that any drug used in the US is tested to those standards.

The problem isn't (only) that US drug standards are strict. The problem is that the financial burden of testing a new drug, which is significant, lies solely on the manufacturer, who can only recoup those costs by selling patented drugs at high prices. This means that the incentives don't line up for drugs not covered by US patents: because there's no profit in selling them, no manufacturer can justify funding the clinical trials to get them approved. This despite the fact that society would, as a whole, benefit from having those studies done.

One obvious solution would be a government program whose mission is to identify promising treatments for which private incentives don't line up, and shepherd them through the approval process by funding clinical trials and so on. You could also imagine a free-market variant, in which the government just auctions off US patent rights for foreign drugs; the auction winner gets exclusive rights to sell the drug in the US for some limited period of time in exchange for agreeing to fund FDA approval.
Ask HN: Have you (IT pro) ever been paid doing your hobby (non-IT)?
I wander how it feels :)

I'm a software engineer and an amateur drummer, so I was thinking finding some temporary gig - getting paid as a drummer and percussionist...

Did any of you experience similar event in your life? How does it feel? :)

Thanks!
Well, ignoring the on-line aspect, this is the standard beginning book: http://www.amazon.com/Feeling-Good-The-Mood-Therapy/dp/03808...

I read and used the early '80s edition, before the "behavioral" was added to it, and around a decade or so ago realized that learning and following it made further talking therapy essentially useless.

The theory behind the "cognitive" part of it, simply put, is that thinking bad, not to mention incorrect, thoughts about yourself makes you feel bad. Adjusting your mental filters and the like to reality can then make a very big difference.

(Not, in my case, a complete cure, I've got an inherited refractory depression that my doctors and I supposize is bipolar in nature, I just never go manic nor cycle all that much. Adding a SSRI to the mix significantly improves it.)
The author mentions two interpretations of probability, the frequentist and the bayesian one. With both interpretations, a negative probability does not make sense. The frequentist thinks of the ratio number of occurences in the limit of an infinite number of experiments. Negative probabilities would imply negative numbers of occurences (which does not really make sense).

In the bayesian interpretation, probabilities are somewhat of a generalization of boolean logic. Based on the assumption that there is True (1) and a False (0), probabilities represent the degree of reasonable believe that a proposition is true. I.e. probabilities are bound in (0, 1).

While in math it often turns out that one should not dismiss a certain extension of a calculus (complex numbers are the textbook example, they are not immediately recognizable as "natural" but they work flawlessly and give interesting insights), I really do not get the point here, why would we need negative probabilities? What could we gain from using them?

The example brings up an example from the theory of interest, it seems that he identifies an expectancy value-like equation with negative probabilities. I wonder if this could be interpreted as a quasi-discrete case of probability-densities, which can be indeed negative.
4 Disciplines Necessary in Building a Startup
Overthinking it. The Russian regulations presumably are adequate to protect her own citizens; its not necessary for US sufferers to sue in Russia to correct manufacturing problems there.

Its hubris, American regulatory groups sticking their fingers in the affairs of other countries. And its beyond their charter to try to regulate what Americans do; they're supposed to regulate what American manufacturers do, not private citizens?
Original: http://www.quora.com/Salaries-and-Wages/What-is-a-job-that-m...
But the argument still stands, right? Who will be responsible if the "extremely well-understood drugs" have some problems in the US? They don't care about US population because it is such a small market for them. Let's say we lower teh barrier of entry by waiving these "extremely well-understood drugs" from proper research in US. There are instances of drugs that exhibit different side effect profile due to genetics in different population, and this sometimes tip off the risk-to-benefit balance, how do you account for that?

The more barrier you place for drug approval, the safer it will be. It is a classical risk-versus-benefit trade-off. If there is an option that may be slightly more effective than current practice but has unknown (or perceived less certain) side effect profile, healthcare industry mindset prefers the status quo.

"First, do no harm." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_non_nocere
Videos about Django
You can use Google translate:

https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=af&tl=en&a...
If school were for-profit, what incentive would there be to provide quality schooling to those who can only afford to pay very little, or can't afford to pay at all?
> But the only thing the author bases this on is the summary of a study in russian that the author can't even read.

Not true. He said that "they seem to have pretty good evidential support", and that russian study was used only as an example. Also while comparison tu room temperature superconductivity might be a hyperbole, apparently drug having "both stimulant and anti-anxiety properties" that "millions of Russians have been using for decades and are by and large still alive" is something really big in the field of medicine.
China's ghost cities are unrelated to this. When China invests in ghosts cities their GDP goes up based upon infrastructure spending. In other words, one of the reasons why China invests so much in infrastructure, some of which is never used, is because it pushes their GDP numbers higher.

That being said, the Canal Project would affect Nicaragua's GDP and would have no bearing on China's. Nicaragua's GDP is roughly $10 billion, so it would have a very large impact.

There is no financial benefit for the Chinese government to back up such a project, and the political benefits seem dubious.

This project will not happen, and its unfair to the people of Nicaragua to give them false hope of better economic prosperity from the project.
really the link posted by another commenter here http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html is worth a read
Maybe the FDAs mandate could be changed to regulate drugs to maximise the benefit to society. That way things like Melatoin should be allowed and the shenanigans detailed in Bad Pharma (book by Ben Goldacre) should be dealt with. There seems a lot of stuff that is not entirely in the public interest at the moment.
so is this article about drugs, presumably a complex molecule involving many elements, or actual new chemical elements?
Wa alaikum salaam wa rahmetullah!
OP described exactly how the author began his article. Your apologetics are tendentious. I hate to break this to you, but the author you have gone out of your way to praise is a very shallow thinker who darts around to create the illusion of a solid argument. It's just sad that you find him thought-provoking. I suggest Critical Reasoning 101 for you.
I have gone through the Panama Canal twice (I like cruise ships :-)

It is slow at each end going through the locks, but not so slow going through the lakes.
Their dad writes a blog. So they do have access, and maybe they do use it, maybe not.
About drugs that work well, are deployed around the world and US has no equivalent of, that somehow still don't get imported to America.
So true. When all students were mainstreamed, it did a huge disservice to every student. Essentially it means troubled kids don't get help; and everybody else gets no education. The classroom can be turned into a day-care space.
I don't think there's any substitute, especially in terms of overall transaction speed, to learning your route. A simple mapping system won't tell you which door to deliver to or how best to get to it, and looking up every destination, especially at that level of detail if annotated, is going to slow you down significantly.

That presumes low turnover, which we have to at least some degree in my home town of 55K, "metro area" of 200K.
Ah, thanks for sharing their explanation. That stills seems awfully weird to me.
There must be some ambiguity in the article, because GP's reading looks plausible to me. For example,
"You can’t have one set of elements in Russia and another in the US, everyone would work together and compare notes. At the very least one side would have the common decency to at least steal from the other. No way anything like this could possibly go on.

But as far as I can tell this is exactly the state of modern psychopharmacology."

It's not obvious whether the author really thinks that the Russians have found some new elements, or is just using the term 'element' to mean 'chemical', but either is erroneous.
I would be on the same page as you if the FDA and the American medical establishment had a great track record of protecting Americans from harm. As it is there's massive over-prescription of dangerous chemicals doing serious harm. Remember Vioxx? Remember estrogen hormone replacement therapy? There's currently massive, dangerous over-prescription of statins, amphetamines for kids, female hormones, and SSRIs.

Consequently I take a bit of a more libertarian perspective on pharmaceuticals. You can't really trust the government or most doctors anyway. So people might as well be more free to find helpful chemicals.
The author doesn't prescribe them because they don't want to get sued.

The fda doesn't allow them because they are (argues the author) run by big pharma.
I've met plenty of homeschooled people/parents. What on earth do you mean by socially crippled? If anything, these people have been the most socially apt people I've met.

Maybe that is because I value different social traits than you do.
Egypt's Most Talented iOS Developers
Yes, regulation is always improved by additional regulation.
What part of the first sentence "imagine if a chemist told you offhandedly that the Russians had different chemical elements than we did" you both fail to understand?

The OP seems to have read something completely different than I (or somehow skipped every other paragraph). At this point it doesn't matter what the text is or who wrote it. It's a failure of reading.
Learning can be hard. Kids love easy things. It takes direction, monitoring, pushing to get them to try to read, or do arithmetic, or master pretty much any delayed-gratification skill.

Left on their own, kids will likely get a broad shallow education with one or two deep dives into subjects of dubious value.
I would recommend moving away from the "snowflake server" pattern and store the server configuration under version control, automated via a tool such as Ansible, Chef or Puppet. I find it useful even when I only plan to have one instance of such server, because I know I can recreate it if needed.
Not quite.
It was part of Russia from 1783 till 1918 (or so) then it was Part of USSR.
But let's make it 1954 as you wrote, so it gives 171 years.

Before 1783 Crimea was part of Ottoman Empire (Crimean Khanate), from about 1449. That makes 334 years.

And before that Mongols ruled there from about 200 years.

And even before it belonged partly to Kiev Rus' and Bizantium for another 300 years.

So basing solely on the years (assuming that what you mean by historically) it looks like Crimea should go back to Turkey or split between Ukraine and Greece, surly not to Russia.
Look at the first sentence of the post. Or the beginning of the paragraph you just quoted. Elements being different in different countries is clearly marked as an absurd example.
If by 'socially crippled' you mean unscarred by bullies, unbored by mass indoctrination lectures, and untutored in vandalism and cheating, then sure.
A Mother’s Journey Through the Unnerving Universe of ‘Unboxing’ Videos
> In India, hair dressers can earn more than employees in the software industry. During a recent visit to the salon...

Are they really using Quora as a reference? Even if this is honest, the responder went to probably one of the top salons in Bangalore, in which case the same would hold in Western countries. Most hair dressing jobs in India are low paying, and most of the rest are average paying.
Wow, this article merely rephrases the Quora comments' without contributing anything new to the discussion.
Perpetuity – DataMapper gem (works with Rails)
Not surprised at all re: construction workers. That they can make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year is sort of a semi-open secret. The catch is that construction is a feast or famine occupation. During building booms, contractors and workers can make a small fortune. During busts, they can go bust. New York is a great place to be a construction worker, as there always seems to be a steady supply of new projects underway. San Francisco, right now, is making a lot of construction workers quite wealthy. But this boom will go bust eventually, and when it does, the demand drop will shock supply, and the jobs will dry up virtually overnight. Nobody has any great idea when that will happen, but the workers I've talked to [1] are an odd mix of giddy and pessimistic. There is sort of a "get it while the getting's still good" mentality afoot right now.

As you might imagine, any jobs tied to real estate development very closely track the real estate market, be it residential or commercial. That market can be exciting, but it's also inherently unstable.

[1] I don't work in construction, but I have invested in a few buildings, and I talk to contractors and workers pretty regularly.
I use RSS for nearly everything. RSS allows you to avoid the fear of missing great stories or content due to timing, groupthink flagging, etc. You can also follow individual user comments with RSS with some quick mods.

An added bonus is that RSS preserves [dead] stories. Once a story is [dead], it won't show up in hn.algolia.com search results, even though it still shows up on HN.
> One obvious solution would be a government program whose mission is to identify promising treatments for which private incentives don't line up, and shepherd them through the approval process by funding clinical trials and so on

You already have this. It's called Orphan Drugs in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_drug

> a free-market variant, in which the government just auctions off US patent rights for foreign drugs

This will probably work. But once the barrier is too low, a lot of "useless" drugs will show up (i.e. providing more choices to prescribers but in reality does not really give much benefit) - and you need to fund those too using the taxpayers' money.
I agree with TeMPOraL, the first sentence sets up the example:

> Imagine if a chemist told you offhandedly that the Russians had different chemical elements than we did.

Make it clear that different elements being used in Russia is a hypothetical. He then uses it to show the absurd state of the state of psychopharmacology.
The Pyra (Linux Handheld) at GamesCom in Germany
How we decided to move away from Fireworks and embrace Sketch
Agreed. The most valuable class I ever took was high-school typing. In my profession I see folks resist revisiting/improving code, because it takes them so damn long to type anything.
Over-prescription is the problem of the prescribers' and their incentives, not FDA. FDA opens the tap, prescribers put the water in the cup and give to patients. Patients do not access the water directly. Your concern is better directed to American Medical Association (AMA).

If you think you can find helpful chemicals on your own, you are either very confident to use your own body as a guinea pig or suffering from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect .
Pretty bad to see from the BBC, but at least you don't have to sign in to see it.
That is how author began the article, but that's just shitty writing. The author goes on to say:

> If a chemist told you this, you would think they were crazy. Science, you would say, is science everywhere. You can’t have one set of elements in Russia and another in the US, everyone would work together and compare notes. At the very least one side would have the common decency to at least steal from the other. No way anything like this could possibly go on.

> But as far as I can tell this is exactly the state of modern psychopharmacology.

Which is telling us that the peculiar elements stuff was some weird hyperbolic example to make us realise just how strange it is that we ignore Russian pharmacology.

(I downvoted you for your needlessly aggressive tone.)
A person can go a lifetime as a typing cripple. It takes work to get out of bad habits and into good ones. And its a delay-gratification process - you're screwed up for a week or so as you deconstruct your typing reflexes.

OR, they can take a class or buy a learn-to-type book, bite the bullet and study/practice.
If you are an employee, a degree is useful. Employers care about portfolios and past working experiences much more than they do about grades, but a CS diploma is what gets your foot in the door for an interview at a decent firm or being considered for a promotion, at least in your first years.

If you are the boss it's a little bit different: It's all about the product, knowing how to surround yourself with the right people, being motivated, making connections, your conviction and ability to sell and speak in public and your past experiences running or participating in other companies' big decisions.
I sometimes wonder why people make these egregious reading comprehension mistakes. It sometimes seem to come from reading stuff too literally. Are the people who do this really smart but simply too analytically inclined to comprehend normal prose?
> The fda doesn't allow them because they are (argues the author) run by big pharma.

The author argues that "big pharma" doesn't seek the FDA approval because there's no way to recoup the expense.

To quote,

"Absent an extremely strong patent on the drug there’s no reason a drug company would want to go forward with all of this. I don’t know what the legalities of buying Russian drug rights from Russian companies are, but I expect they’re complicated and that pharmaceutical companies have made a reasoned decision not to bother."

Note the reasoned decision part. The author's actual point is summarized in the N-2th paragraph:

Everyone follows their own incentives perfectly, and as a result the system as a whole does something insane. Classic multipolar trap..
It's not that weird if you understand the market in the UK.

As the BBC is a publicly funded broadcaster in competition with advertising supported private entities it has to be very careful to keep a Chinese firewall between it's commercial arm BBC Worldwide and the stuff that is done with public money otherwise the other broadcasters will jump all over them with the regulator and the fair market bodies.
Ask HN: How we can improve landing page for upcoming Kickstarter
> The catch is that construction is a feast or famine occupation. [...] There is sort of a "get it while the getting's still good" mentality afoot right now.

Indeed, and that's not good from the point of view of construction standards. When the going is good, contractors go pedal to the metal and will do everything they can as fast as they can, inevitably lowering their average work standards (both in terms of output quality and safety measures). Plus, construction booms typically lead to more widespread economic bubbles.

I wish we could find a way of stabilizing that particular market.
Likewise mining, but to a larger degree. A supervisor or crew boss can make good money, when they have a job at all. Also its dangerous. My relative got a back injury in a mining accident. All the therapy in the world wouldn't remove all the pain. It changed him forever. Was it worth the money?
> The author opens by suggesting that Russians have discovered and use a different set of chemical elements than the ones we use in the United States

I did not read the author suggesting this. Your example was part of a hypothetical analogy.

From the article:

> Imagine if a chemist told you offhandedly that the Russians had different chemical elements than we did.

I can interrupt this as the author setting up a hypothetical scenario to help illustrate the absurd state of psychopharmacology.
I don't know. My natural reaction when reading something that clearly makes no sense is to assume that maybe I misread something, go back a bit and read more carefully.

Maybe it's because some people have the default assumption of "they must be wrong", and others "I might be wrong", and this determines how their knee-jerk reactions look like?
Well, they could always sell monster manuals and pre-canned stories. City maps and politics. Those are the exciting parts, anyway.
Sure, self-directed. But then the support of a tutor is invaluable! Why let the poor kid flounder around, motivated but unskilled at learning? Show them the right path! Or at least all the options.
Migrant agricultural worker from Oklahoma (1937)