skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps, but at the very least nthj is postulating the existence of good jobs for everyone if only they would train effectively for them. I take serious issue with this assumption: even if you found a more effective way to get drowning people out of the water and into lifeboats, how do you know that you won't just sink the lifeboats?

The usual response from those with more faith in the free market than I is that "increased employment will stimulate demand in a virtuous cycle." It's a nice theory and certainly true to a degree, I just don't see any reason why we should expect this virtuous cycle to converge at more-or-less total employment. What I do see is an overabundance of evidence that it does not converge at total employment. I also see a number of disturbing trends that suggest the problem will get worse before it gets better.
Why is it the responsibility or even the right of
carriers to deny people the service they pay for simply because it annoys you?

Texting while driving is a public safety hazard, and that's pretty unambiguous. From where do you derive the right to control what I do in a bar or restauraunt?
Jet fighter pilots are extremely focused at all times and use a HUD to be able to increase focus, not the opposite.

I can't believe I have to say this but JET FIGHTER PILOTS DO NOT USE HUDS TO TWEET.
I can set that up in about 10 steps including dumping db, setting up the offset, importing the db, and setting up reverse replication if you desire. Its super super easy.

This is 6 of the steps: http://www.percona.com/doc/percona-xtrabackup/2.1/howtos/set...
disc brakes are not fashion, man. I hemmed and hawed about them a few years ago, and now I'm never going back. Rim brakes come nowhere near the control and stopping power, which I am indescribably grateful for as I'm rocketing down my local rockbed trails.
The real question is what would have his life been like without that aid? Perhaps no education, no money for health care. Perhaps even loss of life (or a family member)?

On aside, since it was covered so heavily: I have heard of more than a few people who lose their faith due to church behavior. This seems almost immature thinking to me. If you see a problem with church leadership behavior, and you don't see fault in the beliefs, why not affect change in the church? Ask those tough questions about what money is spent on. This seems far more logical than abandoning faith.
Thankfully. You should be running a supervisor process and probably a logging process along with your app process at the least.
Hmm. I think I took Yxven's comment out of context which in turn made my comment out of context. I agree that interruptions like reading a text message are dangerous regardless of how they are done. They are obviously more dangerous if you have to take your eyes off the road to do it is what I was saying.

In regards to long trips, I still maintain that having a distraction like music, audio books, or company to talk to is actually safer than not having them. Your brain getting tired of monotonous activity and scenery is a real thing as anyone who's done a 10 hour drive can tell you. But again my comment wasn't really in the same context as the parent I guess, so there's that.
All depends on your terrain. My local trails are rock gardens, often with broken rock ranging from softball to football size. I still ride a hardtail, but I can tell you the shocks & bumps are so bad that I spend a lot of the ride down with zero traction.
> I'll bet anyone $100 that the voice recognition isn't good enough that you won't be staring at the screen to check it's getting the right words.

Let me take that bet ;). Some people really don't care, and it makes me want to kill them when I get a voice-typed message that's complete gibberish because the sender thinks comprehensibility is for the losers.
This comment is asking for trouble, but I'm making it in the hope of getting some good discussion going, and hopefully not a flamewar. I've been thinking about this a lot lately since my own family is struggling with this issue.

I very strongly feel, like many people probably do, that I would not want to live with dementia. I would not want to live that non-life, I would not want my family to have to experience it, and I would not want to burden them with my care. In the not-unlikely event that I'm diagnosed with Alzheimer's or some other form of dementia, I would want to end my life while I'm able to competently choose to do so. I would want to do so with quick and painless drugs instead of a gun. However, assisted suicide is only legal in a handful of US states, and then only in cases of terminal illness with less than six months to live. There is nowhere in the US for an early-state dementia patient to commit assisted suicide.

It is currently legal in Switzerland to do so, and people have traveled there for that very purpose. [1] Other people have committed suicide without assistance to avoid the ravages of dementia. [2]

I'm aware of the counter-arguments to assisted suicide: that it can cross the line into euthenasia, that it makes the most vulnerable in our society even more so... but still, there has to be some way for this to be legalized.

What to do? What are some concrete proposals for how to alter existing legislation to allow assisted suicide in cases of dementia? Does anyone have personal stories that make the argument against it?

[1] http://www.bbc.com/news/health-22715363
[2] http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/09/01/ethically-this-seems...
Celebrate Programmers' Day: dust off your old program and put it on GitHub
This is actually one of my favorite things about riding a motorcycle. It removes the 'safety net' of the car and forces one to pay full attention to the road. Texting is simply out of the question.
Levinus Vincent’s Wonder Theatre of Nature
Comcast Declares War on Tor?
I wonder if Ijon Tichy would better be translated as "Ion Slow" - after all his name is a word-play (compare to Buzz Lightyear, haha).
The title led me to believe they were using some kind of rocket technology.
> In regards to long trips, I still maintain that having a distraction like music, audio books, or company to talk to is actually safer than not having them. Your brain getting tired of monotonous activity and scenery is a real thing as anyone who's done a 10 hour drive can tell you.

This is of course true, and I noticed that drivers anticipating longer trips often like to take someone with them so that the passenger can keep them awake and concentrated.

But then again, on a long trip you really should make those 30-minute stops every 3 hours or so.
I agree with what you are saying and you shouldn't be reading messages or w/e when driving, but surely looking away from the road is more dangerous than not? In the very least it takes more time. Again I'm not encouraging the behavior, just saying not all distraction are equivalent...
I quickly browsed the article and I'm not sure how they defined quality. To answer the original question I'd say pick what you're familiar with or what you can easily hire for in your location.
> Cell phones are not dangerous because the driver was looking at his phone or playing with the buttons when he had an accident. They are dangerous because they encourage your mind to wander.

I'm going to speculate that driving is such an activity that doesn't require constant attention and involves quite a bit of monotony. In such circumstances, mind wandering will happen—be there a mobile phone, Navdy, or nothing at all.

This is a human factor. The only complete solution to this issue seems to be self-driving cars, when your mind and its wandering are taken out of equation.

With that in mind, a mobile phone doesn't seem to stand equal to other causes of mind-wandering, contrary to your claim. A phone also obstructs large portions of the road from your view when you're using it.
They've had remarkable life expectancy with the malaria as well. I'm sure everybody would prefer dying from malaria than MS, getting blind or an amputee from diabetes, and so on. Improvements in life expectancy today is not an improvement of overall health, just the medicine found ways to keep sicker people alive for longer (i.e. countering natural selection). If infectious diseases like tuberculosis and others were eradicated just a couple of centuries earlier, modern medicine today wouldn't be so proud of the accomplishments in life expectancy! Unfortunately, due to widespread abuse, antibiotics are no longer the panacea that they used to be!
If it was a website with heavy traffic mysqldump would possibly take hours to complete and lock your tables for so long it affects requests. Even xtrabackup isn't suitable to run on a master node and it's common to have a dedicated slave for backup purpose.
With a modest infrastructure of marked landing pads on roofs, I think UAV landings are easier than automated car parking. If you're expecting delivery UAVs to fly under the tree line along sidewalks and yards to land directly on a residential porch, then yes, that's extremely difficult. But I highly doubt that this is a remotely feasible plan within a decade or so.
First of all:

Rails is a framework

Django is a framework

Node.JS is a platform/framework

ASP.NET is not a framework, but a language

PHP is not a framework but a language, HHVM is a platform

That being said: you did not specify what exactly you are planing to do. For most scenarios, the choice of the environment doesn't really matter. What DOES matter is that you find someone that is proficient, has experience and knows the pros/cons in whatever framework he is using.

If you really need minimal memory and CPU footprint, i'd suggest you choose Go.
It's not a statistical error. Overall, the maximum age that anyone gets to is not much higher than before, but:

1. Many more people reach old age than previously (due to reduced infant mortality), so old age diseases are a larger problem for society since a larger portion of society is getting old. (not citing a source for this because it's extremely well established)

2. Life expectancy for various ages (not just starting at birth) has increased steadily over the last 100 years. Check out page 3 here: http://www.osfi-bsif.gc.ca/Eng/Docs/DEIP_Gallop.pdf

Life expectancy improvements at various ages over the past 100 years:

At birth: +27 years

At age 15: +14 years

At age 45: +10 years

At age 65: +5 years

At age 80: +2 years

Functional medicine is not responsible for the increases in life expectancy.
> They are obviously more dangerous if you have to take your eyes of the road to do it is what I was saying.

Yeah, for sure. That's the problem with this sort of product: you release it without texting functionality and [most people will reach for their phone to text] and [some people will stop texting while driving]. And lose product sexiness etc.

You release it with texting and people will think it gives them carte blanche to text while driving. Both not great outcomes.
>ASP.NET is not a framework, but a language

C# and VB.NET are languages. ASP.NET is a framework.
While the points are valid, I do wonder what TechCrunch would be saying if Apple, for example, was doing the acquiring.
Extrinsic Motivation: And You Thought Inverted Pendulums Were Hard
If they vacate the labor market and start spending their savings, it could be a very good thing indeed.
I listened to a set of U2 albums this week.
I could recognize only one song!

They're clearly not a memorable band, contrarily to the Beatles (whether you appreciate them or not) or the Pink Floyds.

(I'm 50 years old, so it's not a question of age).
I would have to disagree with the age. 14 seems like the time when someone starts consciously listening to music. U2 was popular around the 90 to 00 and the last good album U2 created was 10 years ago. Therefore 20 and younger probably don't know them. I would like to see a pool to confirm or disprove this.

Here is something interesting: http://musicmachinery.com/2014/02/13/age-specific-listening/
That explains 2 of the vehicles. It still does not explain the ladder truck or the fire engine.

> Diesel and miles on the truck are cheap, and peoples' time is a sunk cost.

Is a fair point. That ladder truck exists just in case an earthquake breaks the water lines and sprinklers stop working. I still do not see my city (or many others) as shining examples of efficiency. This does not mean I want to privatize things like fire departments and police as that would has its own issues, but neither do I think cities are so efficient that we should have them handle more things.
This will make driving safer for me. I'm already checking my speedometer and other instruments and often use a GPS. Now I can do all that while not removing focus from the road. This looks like a great device and the pre-order price is fantastic.

And yes, I have no problem with the head patting/belly rubbing. Have you ever seen a cop driving a patrol car? He's juggling radios, phones, a computer with a big screen for looking up warrants and stuff, entering plate numbers, looking out the windows for suspicious behavior - the actual road is a mere distraction. People can learn to manage their divided attention, and if they can't handle checking a speedometer without crashing into the guardrail they probably shouldn't be driving.

That said, I wouldn't use this to text while driving. Seeing who's calling and waving my hand to answer for a brief "I'll be there in 10 minutes" seems reasonable, however, and is safer than fumbling with the phone the old-fashioned way.
Well, in America, the placebo effect is more effective than many pharmaceuticals, so, yes, I'd recommended homeopathy as well, knowing that it can do well and for sure do no harm compared to drugs that just address symptoms, don't cure anything, and do certain damage especially in the long run. I'm not saying that plecebo could help anyone with PMS, I honestly doubt that, but he lists that as the last resort in that particular article and being a doctor who's seen a lot of patients, why would I doubt his recommendation? Maybe it really works for some, how can I know?
So we need to wait until some poor shmucks kill a few kids and pregnant mothers before we can realize this product (as currently advertised) is a bad idea? I thought we're smarter than that.

HUDs are not bad. But Navdy keeps marketing their product as a text-while-driving aid. Not very smart.
Why is it the responsibility or even the right of carriers to deny people the service they pay for simply because it annoys you?

Exactly!! Are we so immature that we can't take responsibility for our own behavior and want laws and systems to do for us what we should do for ourselves?
>What is unenforceable about it? Seems enforceable to me.

How do you propose punishing people who leak nudes over Tor?

Many of (perhaps all of) the recent celebrity nudes were leaked/sold on onion sites first.
Not that it's without dangers, but you don't have to look at a screen to verify text message dictation. You dictate, it reads it back.

I think better would be a standard library, like "report I'll be late," that relays my current coordinates and ETA in the message to my spouse. (And simply showing up late would make me nervous; reporting my delay relieves tension.) I'm not a brain scientist so I can't say what the total effect would be.
My use case is the equivalent of adding printf's to various obfuscated methods, for purposes like:

- Determining if/when/how the method is called, i.e. understanding how specific operator actions affect the program flow

- Dumping out arguments or intermediate values, to see if I recognize the data or have properly identified the purpose of the obfuscated method

- Extracting secrets buried in the program, without having to reverse engineer the storage format

- Printing out strings or byte arrays after the de-obfuscator code has run (FWIW I have also used ASM for this when I had a bunch of similarly-obfuscated .class files to process)

This tends to be a manual, iterative process - not necessarily something well-suited to applying the same "formula" to every method. So I'll find an interesting method (often identified using strings or magic numbers), instrument it, and rerun the program. That result will determine what gets instrumented next. Being able to run "make ; java -jar new.jar", and only reassemble the files that have changed, is a huge time saver.

I'd actually prefer to use a debugger, but the best solution I found was Dr. Garbage[1] and it doesn't allow inspection of objects on the operand stack, or breakpoints on specific opcodes. Also, attaching a debugger to a more complex multithreaded system, such as a J2EE application server, may be tricky.

[1] http://www.drgarbage.com/bytecode-visualizer/
I walk 2 miles to and from work every day. I can tell you fiddling with phones is rampant along the path I walk. I often see people not yielding to me who are looking at their phones. If I weren't such a defensive walker, I might be dead now.
The Potemkinism of Privacy Pragmatism
But incomplete. And they reduced the number of the available documents.
Alzheimer's is terrible, but the way our current medical system handles old age makes it even worse. A doctor friend of mine wrote an essay on this, titled Who By Very Slow Decay (http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/07/17/who-by-very-slow-decay/):

"Somewhere in the process your mind very quietly and without fanfare gives up the ghost. It starts with forgetting a couple of little things, and progresses until you have no idea what’s going on ever. In medical jargon, healthy people are “alert and oriented x 3″, which means oriented to person (you know your name), oriented to time (you know what day/month/year it is), and oriented to place (you know you’re in a hospital). My patients who have the sorts of issues I mentioned in the last paragraph are generally alert and oriented x0. They don’t remember their own names, they don’t know where they are or what they’re doing there, and they think it’s the 1930s or the 1950s or don’t even have a concept of years at all. When you’re alert and oriented x0, the world becomes this terrifying place where you are stuck in some kind of bed and can’t move and people are sticking you with very large needles and forcing tubes down your throat and you have no idea why or what’s going on.

So of course you start screaming and trying to attack people and trying to pull the tubes and IV lines out. Every morning when I come in to work I have to check the nurses’ notes for what happened the previous night, and every morning a couple of my patients have tried to pull all of their tubes and lines out. If it’s especially bad they try to attack the staff, and although the extremely elderly are really bad at attacking people this is nevertheless Unacceptable Behavior and they have to be restrained ie tied down to the bed. A presumably more humane alternative sometimes used instead or in addition is to just drug you up on all of those old-timey psychiatric medications that actual psychiatrists don’t use anymore because of their bad reputation."
All these bikes were at the SFO International Terminal awhile back. It was pretty neat seeing all the old frames again and the evolution.
There are other professions that make money. But it's possible to get educated in all kinds of fields where either there isn't much demand for work, or the work intrinsically breeds a few stars and others in the field get nothing.

Not that there's necessarily anything wrong with pursuing those fields anyway; the question is, are the people going into them properly informed?
There is an interesting harm reduction angle to products like this.

It's probably the case that people using Navdy will drive worse than people with 100% attention on driving. It's also quite likely they'll drive better than people using a cellphone directly. The question is if it makes people feel safer and thus more willing to do the dangerous activity, countering the safety benefit. (There's also a clear benefit to people actually using phones while driving; letting people know they're late, not being bored, etc. It's just generally trumped by the safety loss; I'd be willing to sacrifice SOME safety for convenience/entertainment.)

It's the same thing with sex (abstinence vs. barrier-based birth control vs. hormonal birth control), drugs (illegal vs. decrminalized vs. legalized), etc.

It's possible NOT having technologies like this leads to overall less safety; it's also possible it leads to more safety. It depends on the specifics.

I have nav (with voice, and a driver information display in my line of sight while driving), and use that, and also don't feel particularly bad about looking at my phone screen to see who called, etc. while stopped at a red light (although I realize it's less than perfectly safe; it's also more of a legal risk than a safety risk in california now, IMO.)

Actually using the phone while driving, or having anything but the most brief and cursory conversation while driving in the city, is clearly a sacrifice in safety; I don't mind phone calls on highways, but I generally won't answer in the city.
So the weird pol-pot polemic stands. But this gets downvoted?
> I'm going to speculate that driving is such an activity that doesn't require constant attention...

Stop there. What would lead you to this speculation?

Of course driving requires constant attention and care, the full time you are behind the wheel of an automobile. You're piloting a 2 ton machine made of whirling metal and filled with flammable liquid traveling at high speeds, usually within less than a meter of someone else doing the same.

There is never a good reason to divert attention from the task of driving while you are driving. Full stop.
One of the problems is that whatever you happen to be focusing on, you also have to be able to react quickly to potential hazards. I'm pretty sure (guessing) that being not particularly focused on the road is still significantly better than being focused on a mobile phone/Navdy.

I've read the literature on multitasking while driving. Texting is one of the worst. Talking on the phone comes somewhere in the middle (hands free or not doesn't seem to matter), but even talking to passengers has a measurable decrease in safety. The problem is that people, as a whole, are willing to bear quite a bit of risk in order to indulge in their distractions, but their behavior additionally forces those around them to bear some of the risk as well.

I agree that self-driving cars are a huge way forward for safety, but in the meantime it makes sense to minimize human error.
or you can just smoke weed...all the time. surely that is better than killing yourself.
As you can tell by your own sample, above 50, the improvements are more like a rounding error than anything. Considering that most of these "improved" lives are actually suffering from various chronic diseases, I don't think there's any improvement. It doesn't really matter if one lived 80 or 82 years, the quality of life of those 80 years is what matters and given how much time is invested now in healthcare compared to zero to nothing in the past, that is really non-productive, no fun, i.e. wasted time, so, subtract that from the overall lifespan and there's no improvement at all and on the contrary!
I'm confused. From the article:

"The results are released by family, not by individual, so the median family income may include the income of both spouses. Single-person households are included in the family calculations."

Doesn't this study simply measure the fact that someone who is fifty years old is likely to have a spouse, while someone who is twenty is less likely to have one?
This is one of these things where instead of an article with a bunch of pictures, someone should have just turned on his smartphone camera and done a video of using one.

You know, like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7OxvLuK83g

(The voice is eerily Half-Life..)