skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm sure its a lot easier of a decision when your work is paying you full salary for it. Although, I'm not sure how common/uncommon that is.
#1: People should have some form of influence on their own governance.

#2: Any method of assigning relative degrees of influence is unacceptably vulnerable to a corruption by the advantaged party tantamount to a violation of #1.

Side note: Efficiency of law production is not a metric most people will consent to prioritizing above metrics like perceived justice.
Back in 2011, when I was starting with node.js I built something I called 'Writeboard' https://github.com/gtramontina/Writeboard . It's not an active project anymore, but I've considered resuming working on it. A rewrite of it is hosted in heroku, at http://writeboard2.herokuapp.com/ -- Check it out.
Are these chicks serious? no way
A link to this would really be helpfull
I think you are talking about this[1], indeed you are right.

However, task dependencies allows sequential tasks execution, but that's not very handy as you may want a same task to be executed in two different sequences.

Let's see a simple example on which I honestly struggle to reproduce with Gulp:

[Lint, Test] -> Concatenation -> Minification

Watch -> [Lint, Test] -> LiveReload

How would you do such a setup without having a redundancy in your tasks declaration?

[1]: https://github.com/gulpjs/gulp/blob/master/docs/recipes/runn...
Totally experimental, by the way...
These were things that I found influenced you in favor of the plaintiff (after going back and trying to find all of them):

- Blue collar
- 30 or older
- Household income < 50k
- employed part time/unemployed
- social services, left-leaning causes
- don't like puzzles or games w/ rules/concentration

The last 4 are about how likely you are to influence other jurors, which increases your risk score.
the points given for being over 30 doesn't help much at all. Frivolous lawsuits & being involved in "Social services, health, mental health" appear to be the big deal.
Smart and effective doesn't necessarily imply better policy.

Better policy for them, perhaps, but not for everyone else.
He lived for years without the need to define himself. And then someone asked him to.

So for a while, perhaps he was free from definitions.
I have fully supported legalization for a very long time, and probably include more in my 'legal drug' category. For me, the trade in is always that addiction help must be freely available and based on medicine. Age restrictions are a must, as are fairly tough laws on public intoxication.

It seems most countries experimenting have had good results. Portugal is especially interesting - they didn't exactly legalize everything, but have decriminalized everything (including things like heroin), made treatment free, and are flexible on the fines they do happen to give.

All this said, though, complete legalization of all forms of cannibus (possible strength restrictions) and some hallucinogens are a start. It is wonderfully freeing and nice to be able to sit in a coffee shop or bar and smoke in the same manner that others drink - and be able to walk out of the same place less obviously inebriated than the patrons drinking alcohol.
No, it's still one-person-one-vote. Voting is used to get agreement on what counts as a good outcome. The money and betting come in when trying to determine what policies are most likely to lead to the desired outcomes.
Yep, I can see it working in some situations. I'm glad I had health insurance though - I had appendicitis in my late 20s and the surgery cost $20k-$25k, most of which was covered. Its easy to think that nothing will happen when you are young, but it can and often does. :)
Probably depends on how long it lasts.
https://github.com/HouzuoGuo/tiedot
I just got accepted to the GT OMSCS as well for the January group. When do you start or have you already started? What's your focus? I'm focusing on parallel computing and machine learning.
I'm finding the pause button doesn't react in time for me to catch the song most of the time. By the time I realize I like what I'm hearing it's already too late to pause it. An adjustment for time per song would be great.
The judge and lawyers ask these questions during a process called voir dire.

The judge and lawyers are concerned about making sure each juror is unbiased. How you answer question A regarding topic B could be very revealing of your bias towards the case even if neither question A nor topic B have anything to do with the case. People often lie on question X on topic Y (questions and topics more directly related to the case), or their answers often don't reflect how they actually act in the jury room.
Read the associated NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/nyregion/for-service-on-so...
You've never been poor.

$2-3 / day for food is doable (Cali groceries are a bit more expensive so maybe $4 here). Cut out all but the cheap meats. bread and veggies are super cheap (corn can be 5/$1 when it is in season)

no insurance. no internet (libraries are great). no car.

I never had expenses above $1000/month (not counting the month I paid $1000 to buy my first car) until I moved to the bay area and started making six figures.
Unsure if OP is the maintainer, but a quick point: Benchmarks without any indication of underlying hardware don't convey a huge amount of information.
> when someone's being shady

in Cal Anderson park that's a roundabout way of saying "always"
Based on a few minutes of observation, Ed Sheeran is the most popular artist in the world.

Is there any sophistication behind the sound clip selection? Just a certain static point in each song, or some kind of algorithm to get to a recognisable part?
Dunno, but I'll bet the internal reasoning is somewhere between "we need to drive adoption of Payments" and "we'll save an extra percent or two that otherwise goes to a 3rd party".
The market is not some entity that exists outside of human society, it's a product of that society. And "one person one vote" is a foundational principle of how we organize ourselves as a society in the first place. Demanding that someone make economic or legal arguments for it is a category error. It's the bedrock that law and economic life stand upon.
If prediction markets were really the best way for a large, centralised entity to make decisions, you'd think at least a few successful corporations would have implemented it into their corporate governance.

The irony of proposals to reform the whole stakeholders-periodically-approve-an-all-powerful-executive model, on the assumption that markets make for better decisions than individuals with great power and limited accountability, is that markets consistently don't penalise large, successful firms for being almost-invariably run by a bunch of powerful executives whose power is checked only by the occasional AGM.
I'm assuming this can't be used for flying over land due to sonic boom?
As someone who is interested in Northwestern's Predictive Analytics program, I would be interested in hearing your specific issues with that program.
I've read about this before, and I do think it sounds pretty neat, but a small part of me hopes it doesn't work for putting satellites into space, only because the technology doesn't help us land on other planets.
People who are likely to be poor are more likely to side with the investor rather than the investment bank.

But perhaps there are just as many people, who are not poor, who do not trust investment bankers as there are who do trust investment bankers.
Does anybody have a link to that paper?
There are always ways. But I find Grunt much more handy to do it.
I think "one person one vote" is a first principle. It's a moral axiom that people then derive democratic practices from. It's not necessarily something you derive from other principles or facts. It's along the lines of "every life has equal value". People can disagree with those sorts of principles, but they're not logical derivations of universally accepted principles and facts.
How to Save the Net: Break Up the NSA
The Art of the Phone Screen
Data Science Weekly Newsletter – Issue 39
In this system there's an agreed-on concept of "better", and this is standard one-person-one-vote with no money involved. If these "smart, effective rich people" then bet that certain policies will be better, but in fact these policies turn out to only be better for them and are worse for everyone else, they will lose lots of money for betting wrong.
There will be in the future.
This is what I think is going on: in a case like this, there's probably no actual crime (as defined by law), because investing is inherently risky, and therefore losing money is normal. You, as a scientific-minded individual with a basic knowledge of economy, will only convict the adviser if there's actual proof of mismanagement. I'd bet that, in the average case, it would be rather hard for a typical 60 y.o. woman to get evidence of that (assuming there is such a thing). If you said "yes" to the "too many frivolous suits" question, you would be easily conviced that the woman has no real argument, but is suing anyway.

Also, from the "do you like crosswords" question, if you say "no" you get this:

> This is a question about your cognitive style. The plaintiff lawyer believes you may be more likely to respond to the plaintiff's more emotional theme of victimhood rather than looking deeply at the legal and financial details.

I read that as "we don't really have a case, but if our jury identifies with the old woman, they may rule in her favor out of compassion".
Is it a truism that "correctly" has the same definition for a smart, effective, honest rich person as it does for a smart, effective, honest poor person?
Absolutely, but that does not mean that I'm going to have to enable 10 guilty men to perpetrate their crimes.

If a political dissident would approach me I'd more than happily attempt to smuggle his words out of whatever dictatorship he or she is currently living in, that would be my call to make. But whoever gets unfettered access to my network interfaces is going to have to be known to me in person.
This has been on hacker news before, and that I gave some thoughtful comments on it. Anyone have the link?
Brilliant! Just what I needed!
Url changed from http://www.producthunt.com/posts/trov, which points to this.
You can click anywhere on the screen and it'll open a new tab with the song.
this looks fairly promising if the performance is there and you are already using azure for your data since you push into an index versus crawl/pull.

looking at the tech specs [1] you can only search a single index at a time which is pretty limiting. hopefully just a limit of the preview.

[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/azure/dn798933.aspx
hahah! intresting post! (y)
Wow, how'd you get one done so fast? Were you a private preview customer?
Markets only solve the information problem, they don't address the decision problem (given unlimited knowledge of the present, how do we optimize the future? -- an intractable problem) or the measurement problem (were the decisions we made in the past good or bad? What was the GDP in 2011? -- a very hard problem).

Applying markets to problems other than information problems won't work. Using markets to "deci[de] on a political party every few months and that political party makes decisions" isn't bad (just) because it's a one-party state, but because nobody--not even new Soviet man or Madison's government of angels--is actually competent to make the decisions that would be needed to make central planning work. Democratic or Plutocratic or Market-inspired or AI-based central planning all don't work because the problem is central planning, not the method of choosing the planners.
You don't care, but I got to shake hands with Bill Lorensen (marching cubes), Alvy Ray Smith (cofound Pixar, co-invented the alpha channel), Jim Blinn (need I say more?), Tony DeRose (really improved Subdivision Surfaces), Anthony Apodaca (Director of Graphics Research and Development at Pixar Animation Studios, co-created RISpec)...

I'm like a Computer Graphics groupie.
I don't know about any programmes based in the US, but in the UK there's both the Open University ( http://www.open.ac.uk/ ) and the University of London International Programmes ( http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/ ) - both of which are legitimate and well known universities of good repute.
Maybe I'm reading the article wrong, but it seems they are only describing a way to record EMG signals --- and not a way to `control' anything. I've previously worked in neural/EMG recording of flying insects and a major issue to overcome is the effect of the recording apparatus on normal behavior. For instance, a tiny coin-cell battery can have a significant impact on the flying ability of a small insect (we targeted dragonflies). This work described in the article seems to use a very large structure attached to the insect which the insect cannot lift (they describe being held aloft with electromagnetics). I'm definitely curious to see where they go with this though. I'd love to get back into 'insect cyborg' work.

EDIT: And after looking a bit more, it seems that the actual paper describes the surgical process for implanting the electrodes such that the rebuilding of the moths tissue actually makes them be a part of the moth. Cool!
'cause what the world needs is another proprietary NoSQL solution.
Global warming slowdown answer lies in depths of Atlantic, study finds
It depends on how you interpret these phrases. This is valid logic if

"More likely to side with X" => The lawyers believe that you are more likely to side with the plaintiff than with the defendant on the basis of this information (Pr(P | Over $50k) - Pr(D | Over $50k) > epsilon)

"No effect on either lawyer": The lawyers believe that this information provides no insight into your decision (|Pr(P | Under $50k) - Pr(D | Under $50k)| < epsilon).
Would love this on my surface 3
How do you pronounce "futarchy?"
For me, it was painless to get one. I used an agency.
So they can cool the engine, but what about the heat on the rest of the plane?
No more than AWS's SimpleDB.
Related is tiny[0], an in-process document store that supports Mongo-style queries, as well as a style similar to CouchDB views. You can dump its contents to a JSON file.

Also interesting is PouchDB[1], another document storage library. It can be used with Node or in the browser through various backends (like IndexedDB), and can even replicate to CouchDB.

[0]: https://github.com/chjj/tiny
[1]: http://pouchdb.com/
Knowledge: $0. Accreditation: $60k.
A friend of my uncle told me a story about one of his jury duty experiences.

He went through a similar process like the one in the article. In the end, the judge asked a question like, "is there anything else you feel we didn't cover that may introduce bias in this trial?"

He raised his hand and said, "Yes, your honor. The defendant is black and everyone in the jury is white."

He wasn't selected.
Detail would really be usefull!
Wow, this was a genius-move if that's what they were after. I happily gave my info without considering that they may be collecting it beyond the time I close the browser-tab.

Now, I'm just curious to know what everybody else on HN select.

(I got "The defense lawyer has now fallen in love with you.")

My suspicion is that most of HN knows how much money is constantly risked in regards start-ups & investing; some people make it - most people don't... nobody sues because they lost. At least that was my mindset. As soon as I read the case, I was already on the defendant's side unless evidence was shown that the defendant straight-up just went on glamours vacations with the plaintiff's money and never invested at all.
I forgot to add one of the best quotes from yesterday was "Pitch 5 VC's and you'll get 6 different opinions." Curious what YC grads hear about the point "Data is a 4 letter word". Are you guys taught to pitch "monetizing data" as your business model or is this discouraged?
With so many single-page and ajax-powered websites these days, I've pretty much abandoned traditional fetching tools like Curl; in favor of headless browsers like PhantomJS, Selenium, etc. Here's a pretty good list: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18539491/headless-browser...

Of course this only covers the actual gathering of the content, not storing/indexing in an efficient way.
Jury duty was the absolute worst experience of my entire life, bar none. (yes, yes, first world problem).

The first three weeks were sort of interesting. The week in seclusion for deliberation was awful. It was so stressful I couldn't sleep, I was a complete wreck. You spend 14 hours a day cooped up in a small room along with people you slowly start to hate. I get really angry just thinking about it.
Honestly, this seems a bit more like Cassandra or Couchbase than Mongo.
Thanks for the link, that's interesting. But, please, have a look on this site as well: http://www.drroyspencer.com.
This article is poorly written, bringing up Paraceratherium is disingenuous considering they went extinct 23 mya. It took 400 years after Columbus for the American Bison population to drop to near extinction, not 70 years.

Do people upvote articles without reading them?
API for secure data storage?
Have a payments problem we're trying to solve, would love HN input!

Our platform needs to make several payments to suppliers each week, the problem is we don't want to store our suppliers bank details. Unfortunately the only payment method possible right now is via a bank specific file (*.aba) and is manual, but to create that file we need to have stored our customers bank details...

Does anyone know of a platform which can store/retrieve customer sensitive data through an API so we can avoid storing it ourselves?
Radio isn't selective though, you don't make the decision what to play. It's more like the coincidence that you hit play on the same song exactly as the radio DJ does.
Same. And if you escape the mouse, it allows you to look, but gets even more glitchy.
What if, hypothetically, it were the case that switching from "one vote per person" to some new system would result in everyone being better off (by their own subjective notion of "better off," which can include things like how much justice they believe exists, how corrupt laws are, etc.)? Then wouldn't it make sense to argue in favor of this new system?

My point is that even though there are widely accepted moral arguments for why "one vote per person" is the best way to organize society, it really boils down to an economic argument about what the actual results of such a society will be. I suspect few people would support "one vote per person" on moral grounds if they believed that another system would result in a society where everyone is better off. Likewise, I suspect few libertarians, socialists, anarchists, etc. would continue to make moral arguments if they truly believed that their proposed society would end up the way their opponents believe it would end up.

> Side note: Efficiency of law production is not a metric most people will consent to prioritizing above metrics like perceived justice.

Economically efficient law is pretty difficult to argue against. I suspect the vast majority of people will support it if they understand the definition of economic efficiency. From Wikipedia:

"An economic system is said to be more efficient than another (in relative terms) if it can provide more goods and services for society without using more resources."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_efficiency
Capitalism and Communism are not the only possible forms of human organization. As a matter of fact, it can be argued that Capitalism and Socialism (the only kind of Communism for which there are historical records, AFAIK) are two competing and closely related patterns that happened to be dominant in the world during the second half of the 20th century.

As a result, I have a hard time believing Communist cities were significantly less noisy. And while the gun to the head probably happened more than a few times, it's probably not relevant to this discussion.
It seems that the jury selection process selects for people who don't really have jobs and who don't have particularly strong views on much.

If the goal is to act as mere fact checkers and verify that the law is being applied consistently, I get the intention.

However, this is a narrow view of the role of a jury. Juries should also serve as fail-safe, exercising discretion and preventing grotesque aberrations, for instance those coming from minimum sentencing laws.

This is unlikely to happen with this kind of selection.
That's the response you get if you choose Yes for "Do you believe that there are too many frivolous lawsuits in this country?"
Are you sure? Assume the lawyers have access to a table like the following, of previous results.

Plaintiff Defense
Under 50k 75 25
Over 50k 50 50

What's wrong with the Times's conclusions?
That's the one thing this proposal gets right -- the returns to betting marginally better than everyone else are exponential, so they are mostly insensitive to initial conditions. In a world where everything is decided by cointoss, it's better to be born poor and lucky than rich and unlucky.
Hey thanks for posting this. It looks like a great opportunity for me! Are you enrolled in this by any chance?
Something I recently became aware of is that some sites (AT&T Wireless and HBOGo) know when you are using privacy mode. How are they doing this?
the real challenge in portability is where the code must interact with the platform. making C command line tools that run across linux/osx/windows is quite straightforward, but anything more involved can be interesting, esp once you include iOS, Android and WinRT/Phone into the mix.

i'd be curious how reliable your port is too. automated code conversion can introduce subtle and unexpected bugs in a ton of cases... did you measure it somehow?
If it takes longer to refactor the program, that can kill the initiative to do so.

When you do get the program to run, but it turns out that the refactoring is not wanted for whatever external reason, then you just wasted more time than was necessary.

Without the bondage of static typing, you can just refactor a small enough fraction of the program, which can run now in some limited way. You can use that to motivate yourself, or to pitch the idea to other people.

It is helpful to be able to play "what if" without committing a lot of unnecessary time and effort.
Interesting. To be honest, I'm somewhat surprised a mechanical translation of assembly to C didn't result in a lot of hard to track down bugs, considering how much of what's well-defined in assembly being undefined behavior in C.
Let's make a very simple model:

poor? side with investor 100% of the time
rich? equally likely to side with either

And again for simplicity, before they ask you what your income is say they think you're equally likely to be poor or rich, and that this is the first question.

Before they ask the question they think there's a 50% chance you're poor and will definitely side with the investor and a 50% chance you're rich and will side with either. In other words they think you're 75% likely to side with the investor. Then they ask you the question. If you say you're poor then they both update your probability upwards from 75% to 100%, if rich then downwards from 75% to 50%.
the never said "to individuals from any country"... it is still to "US citizens... anywhere in the world".

Because even if you are the US but did not graduated there, you still can't apply.