skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think many people that haven't personally faced what a stroke is in one way or another don't realize how dangerous and life changing the disease is. Also, they don't understand how to detect it.

I have seen it several times. The first time it happened to my grandfather, nobody in the family realised what's wrong only that he seemingly was losing memory and repeating things he just said. Several hours passed until we thought we should perhaps call the medics - stroke was immediatelly recognized by the doctor and the emergency saved my grandfather only with very mild consequences afterwards.
The second time my grandfather got a stroke, he started stuttering and had difficulty speaking. Again, we did not believe it could be stroke, because, you know, he might just be feeling bad. And again, the emergency saved him within a few hours.
During the third and final stroke that we know of family was already aware and he was taken to the hospital early but he was released just a couple hours later with instructions to stay in bed and rest. Overall, about 6 to 8 hours passed until he got the required medical care. After that stroke he spent almost five years doing nothing, just existing - with almost completely blank mind. If only the doctors were professionals and we, the family, would have paid better attention, he would have been saved.

TL;DR: pay attention to the people you know. If something is slightly off and the person himself does not seem aware of it, this is definitely a strong signal that it might be a stroke.
If http://topher.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/50-to-1-sour... is they source of math, I'm not even going to bother taking them seriously.

http://topher.com.au/about-topher/ is his "story".

He is not a climate scientist. He's not an applied physicist. He is, apparently, not even an informed layman, and his only critique is about carbon taxes. He has no projections beyond the year 2100 (so that means that he has no even considered the question of the effects of the BAU scenario as far, you know, sustainability goes beyond that, because we all know that after 2100 a magical fairy with technological powers will find the solution to all of this).

This guy's a clown, he freely mixes political leanings with subious science of people with no credentials on the topic, and it honestly looks like another astroturfing effort, no less in the nation of Australia, known for its massive coal lobby which has been pushing hard for the opposition of a carbon tax.

So I'll keep listening to the top climate scientists for advice instead of some paid shill with no understanding in either economy nor climate not environmental sciences.
>> "It is herds and movements that are disempowering."

> The Civil Rights movement.

> The labor movement.

> The environmental movement.

> The suffragette movement.

> The abolitionist movement.

> The free speech movement.

> The list can go on and on.

Indeed it does, and some will argue that, with some noteworthy exceptions, your list, and other similar lists, proves the point being made by the OP. Most public movements only postpone what they protest against -- the labor movement stands as a classic case.

> Whatever else you could say about these movements, agree or disagree with their aims or effects, its difficult to give credence to the view that they weren't effective or empowering to their members or that their goals could have been achieved without organization.

From a scientific standpoint, we cannot say whether these movements were causes or effects. By the time people were rightly condemning slave ownership on any scale in the U.S., Great Britain had abandoned slavery decades before, and many civilized people in the U.S. and elsewhere saw slavery's abandonment as inevitable.

As to the labor movement, historically it described an arc between ineffectiveness and corruption -- between a promise of a solution, to becoming a bigger problem than the issue it claimed to address.

As to free speech -- well, I see this as a classic example of modern government's basic strategy, which is to find out what people are going to do anyway, order them to do it, then try to take credit for the outcome.
Indeed it does, since you're not even making any premise nor refuting arguments.
Let's say to were making $50,000 per employee in revenue and paying each employee $80,000. You'd be losing money on each hire (and therefore would begin firing people). If you were able to make an additional $100,000 per new hire, you'd continue to hire until you cannot make marginal gains. It's no surprise that the number ends up being 2-3x salary / employee. That's what would be most profitable.
Proposal to abolish leap seconds [Wikipedia]
What a beautiful article.

My girlfriend had three strokes, in succession, two years ago (when she was 22). The night before these strokes occurred, she had a transient ischemic attack (TIA). She began speaking gibberish to her friends. She texted me later that night explaining what happened. Her friends had laughed about it because they thought she was just acting like a goofball. I had no idea these were signs of a TIA, but I told her that if it happened again she needed to go to the doctor immediately.

The next day, the right side of her body went numb. This time, she was around people who noticed something was wrong, and she was immediately rushed to the emergency room. By the next day, I had flown a thousand miles (from the location of my new job) to be with her. She couldn't remember many words. She couldn't read a clock. She did not know the answer to 3 + 0.

It turned out that, similar to the author of this article, clots had traveled through the hole in her heart and up to her brain. Luckily, she recovered fully and was back to her old self within about a month. She had surgery to fix the PFO a couple months later. The neurologist told her that nine times out of ten, the clot travels a different path, and the victim is left dead or braindead. I am so lucky. Writing about this has me in big tears.

I am going to stop writing and go hug her now.
Ah, I have a better outlook on the meaning of the statement I quoted now, thank you (sorry for the harsh one-liner).
Do we need apps?
No.

Is pressing a button more convenient than searching through reviews, getting on the phone, and haggling over the price?
Always.

You could have said something similar about Taxis 5 years ago and we all know how that's going.
I wish Buzzfeed only had articles like this.
If you say nasty things about someone in public, they stop inviting you to their parties. Go figure.
Really, you have? How about because hours of music is illegally uploaded to their site every day?
The whole point of the article is that there was no coverage in previous years, because participants are so terrified of crossing Bezos that they've been assiduous about not talking about it.
And that's how its done!

Provide alternatives. Do not complain that hairball of bash script works (if nobody modifies it).
Figured I'd make a throwaway to answer questions.

I'm the person who goes by The Initfinder General. Feel free to ask and be elucidated about uselessd and my general outlook on systemd/the state of Linux/Unix, if you so wish.

EDIT: Proof it's me: https://forums.darknedgy.net/viewtopic.php?pid=78186#p78186
Or maybe there's no big conspiracy at all, and Bezos just likes to have a good time hanging out with people he likes (which doesn't include the people who have been calling him names in public for the last six months).
Without some coercion, the only one thing can "rein in tuition" is demand - it would happen if significant numbers of college age people would say "the offered product is too expensive for what it gives me, I'm not going to buy".

That's not happening, college enrollment is not dropping like a rock, and the students (or their parents) are willing to suffer the cost increase. So it's their choice - with a dash of tragedy of commons, as it's probably really not worth for a tiny minority to 'defect' from college as a social concept unless a large critical mass does that.
Why, people enjoy the other types of articles - why should they not cater to them as well?
There is an interesting selection process at work here: power brokers rubbing elbows with other power brokers, forming trust bonds and learning who can or can't be trusted not to spill the beans (with all parties knowing that a single infraction means no more invites).

I believe this is the root of the varying forms of "Illuminati" paranoia that have become so pervasive in popular culture. There need not be a single agency or agenda proactively manipulating the world; rather, all it takes is the self-interest of powerful individuals, who recognize the value in keeping secret deals secret, and the aspirationally powerful who recognize this dynamic and conduct themselves accordingly, in the hopes that they'll get invited to the club.

Of course, leaks do happen, but what's so elegant about this system is that it is so blandly informal, looking like little more than the rich indulging themselves.
Ontology is Overrated – Categories, Links, and Tags (2005)
> Do you think game development followed the web off the performance-doesn't-matter cliff and went "welp, we're just going to go write everything in Ruby"?

Cross platform APIs can be native in C/C++. Ruby or Node have nothing to do with it.

> It's not the "olden days," it's today, now.

Sure, it's today now on consoles which provide low quality generic APIs because no one cared to provide high quality ones. That's not a valid reason to say "fire! we now need machine code to save the gaming industry at large". That's a reason to say that console manufacturers don't care about developers besides locking them into their platforms. Luckily this is going to change. Of course you are free to use low level code still when it's really needed.

> I can literally think of a dozen places just off the top of my head in my very much non-gamedev job

We are talking about gaming. I can think of cases where low level development is needed too. That's irrelevant to the discussion about using cross platform APIs vs using platform locked ones.
This explains why XEmacs came into existence, not what compelling reasons there are to use it over GNU Emacs in 2014, which was the original question.
Ask HN: What is the best way to encrypt an off-the-shelf USB drive?
PSGL and GLES are close enough for the discussion at hand; if Cg vs. GLSL is really going to grind your gears you've already lost. You're right about the latter, though--I misunderstood a prior discussion with a friend of mine (he was speaking in hypotheticals, I thought he was speaking in specifics). Mea culpa.

It doesn't change the abject silliness of the sibling thread though.
If a company didn't have a sustainable business model yet and was losing money, then yeah, it wouldn't make sense to pledge for Long-term support. It's kind of a stamp of "Yup, we've our cashflow under control, happy to keep doing what we're doing".

Alternatively, the pledges can all be used individually, so you could use some of the others without a commitment to long-term support. That's a stamp of "We're not exactly sure how sustainable this idea is yet, but we have ethical standards so we'd prefer to let the company fold than to screw you over (privacy/selling data/quietly raising subscription fees etc) to try and reach profitability".

In both those cases, it would make me feel more confident as a user signing up (especially if they're an app for managing some private/personal part of my life).

Yeah, it makes an exit more difficult. Of course if you make no promises to your users, you can make more money because you're free to sell to the highest bidder, no matter what their intentions. But that's kind of the point of these pledges - as a founder it's saying "I care more about maintaining certain values for my users than making myself rich through the first acquisition offer than comes my way". I'm sure there are founders that think that way, even if they're in the minority - that's really who I'm trying to reach.

EDIT: Also, what I've got in the draft is a clause for each pledge about the correct procedure for retracting the commitment (properly informing users and giving them time to act), so if an acquirer really wanted to go back on the pledges they could - but, rightfully so, they may lose some customers who felt strongly about those values.
Maybe we have already won all the easy battles, and the remaining ones are the impassible disputes between powerful entities.

Or maybe the Internet has made most people not care about modern movements, and billionare backdoor power has made it safe to ignore popular unrest.
Evidence that anyone is actually "terrified"?

What is Bezos going to do if they talk about it? Not invite them back the next year?

He doesn't even make them sign an NDA.
"Don't stare at bash code without running it -- that's crazy. I have taught Python and also admonish people to not "stare" at their code; just form a hypothesis and run it. I suspect this is where Haskellers have problems, because they think that not running your code is a good thing."

This was awesome. And, I agree, probably close to the mark.

It is somewhat odd in this day and age when computers do run so bloody fast that so much effort seems to be spent in not just running an application.

Of course, this is clearly easy to take too far. I feel that a lot has been lost by folks that did not first draft out their intentions on paper. (Well, at least I know I have wasted a fair bit of time in that regard.)
So, time for a quick Throne of Thunder raid, then.
I think what people think when they hear "engineer" is, "someone who builds useful objects that are limited by technical constraints and/or expertise."

As software engineers, we are constrained by software technology and knowledge of software and computer science / mathematics. This is similar to how civic engineers are limited by material technology and knowledge of materials and physics / mathematics. I actually think the analogy fits. I don't see what's wrong with it. However, I do agree that sometimes the "builder analogy" can be taken too far.
Dance.js: a music-hacking speaker series and dance party
I think pretty much everyone agrees that SysV init scripts are not the path forward. For example, Debian switched to systemd, and I'm pretty sure that the options were Upstart or systemd -- nobody really wanted to stay with init scripts.

Main problems as I understand them:

- Duplication. init scripts don't even restart daemons if they crash; or if they do you have to duplicate the restart logic in every init script. IMO distros generally do a poor job with their init scripts. They are heavily duplicated and thu inconsistent.

- Dynamic configuration. The runlevel thing is not expressive enough for dynamic desktop and mobile systems where devices come and go. Service dependency metadata is more expressive and natural. This was a main design goal of Upstart.

- Speed. Computers and devices do more now. systemd socket activation is actually a fantastic design IMO (even though I don't like other things about systemd). This lets you parallelize service startup to a much greater extent. Apple's launchd and Solaris SMF did similar things at around the same time.

In the 2000's, all Unix vendors independently decided that init needs to be overhauled, so the problems being solved are real.

More here: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/why.html
RetroArch, Libretro core license violations by Hyperkin’s Retron5
Chrome

Google drive (a lot of stuff was done in it)

Google keep (really, I've deleted evernote as I like simple in use tools)

Pocket (not to forget a lot of helpful links)

Gmail

Buzzsumo (great tool but I've learned about lately. All stuff was done before)

Webflow (to create landing page)

Adobe Illustrator (to make all design)

It seems that my list is too short. But I think that you have to concentrate on your startup idea and not the searching of 'right' tools. If you really need them you can read here: http://www.quora.com/Startup-Founders-and-Entrepreneurs/What...
BuzzFeed is reportedly profitable and growing quickly...if it were to just publish massive, obviously-valuable stories...well, the first thing from a software development perspective, they would've never had the highly-refined production process and CMS they have now...which, among other things, allows them to efficiently distribute to many eyeballs stories big and small.

And of course, the second consequence of being only a "reputable" publisher...they would've never even had a known name. I wish I could name all the many other news/story startups that have promised "just the good stuff" but have failed (Byliner comes to mind)...except they all quit so quickly that it's hard to even remember them.

I appreciate BuzzFeed's strategy as a content-provider and a technology company. And when it comes to actually reading their site, I have an easy tip: The more boring the headline, the better the content.
The rep prefix and detecting valgrind (2012)
Sure, the problem is hard. But so are most problems worth solving. That it's hard doesn't mean it's impossible or excuse bad solutions; Direct3D actually does an extremely good job at it, in fact.

If you've not used modern Direct3D, it's hard to concisely explain how much better it solves this problem than OpenGL. It's just a cleaner, more elegant, faster API (of course, I know this wasn't always the case, but we're talking about now).

Many of the "non-game" problems you mention really have nothing to do with the API and should be solved by third party libraries or the OS. Text rendering is not a GPU feature so don't expect a graphics API to treat it as such. The problems game developers find in a 3D API affect everyone, because at its core the 3D API is just our way of talking to the GPU.

The main complaints from "non-game" applications like this are either common to everyone (texture, render target limits), or application specific things that have absolutely nothing to do with the GPU (like text rendering) and have no place in a low level GPU API.

I know it would make your life easier if the API was more like a library with exactly your use cases already implemented, but that's simply not the role of a hardware API.

P.S. You probably shouldn't be using polygons for font rendering. Nobody does it this way in practice (except rare cases perhaps). But this is another discussion; feel free to message me privately and I'd be glad to provide more info on best practices.
The same way you could ask why GNU Emacs still exists. Because there are people who for various tiny (rational or irrational) reasons dont want to switch the editor they've been using the last 20 years.

It is the same thing as asking why German is still used, now that English is a world language.
Is it me or does anyone here thinks that with the recent progress in static compiled language in user-friendliness, the path of optimizing the ugly parts of dynamic languages outside of the language design itself is a waste of time ?

Note : not saying this research isn't interesting, because it may lead to many different uses. Just about the example chosen itself.
Good thing we have HN to filter the trash out for us.
XEmacs had things (multiple terminals attached at once, internationalization, color themes, input methods, and so on) long before (like a decade before) GNU Emacs had them.

But now GNU Emacs has them, so the only people still using XEmacs are approximately the people who got set up on it 20 years ago and don't feel like changing.

It still exists because things don't pop out of existence when their main reasons for having been created long ago go away.
We're talking about a guy who leads the world's biggest commerce site... gathering writers and artists for a big party where he gives them big gifts and even goes so far to provide them transportation on private planes.

It's an entirely possible explanation that Bezos just loves throwing parties and giving writers gifts for no other reason than the fact that he loves giving people he's not related to big gifts... I don't discount that as a possibility, I'm just saying it's also a possibility that there's backroom dealings taking place designed to strengthen Amazon's position. I don't think it's unreasonable to cast doubt on this theory, that Bezos may have ulterior motives to this party.
you're right, this is a better way of thinking about it.
Very interesting point. A couple days ago, Thiel debated one of the earliest Occupy members, David Graeber. On that very subject you mention. (http://www.thebaffler.com/live?u=social)

The radical left (like Graeber and Chomsky) points out one factor since the 70's is the financialization of the economy. (Financial institutions prefer short-term profits to long-term development.) Also, there's the rise of "neoliberalism", which Graeber argues prefers to destroy capitalism just to achieve one success: getting people to believe there's no alternative to capitalism.

If all that capitalist propaganda's been successful in beating imagination out of people, that they can do far better than the status quo, maybe that explains why people are so depoliticized. Fewer people have passionate visions for a better world.
>It's 'committees or small groups' which made it illegal to buy radium toothpaste. It's 'committees or small groups' which made it illegal to put drugs on the market without testing. It's 'committees or small groups' which put into place federal meat inspections.

You're missing the operative element of my statement, which was "any system where prices are determined". It refers to the specific corruptibility of artifical governmental price fixing and its devastating effects on a free market. It is true that there will always be some element of politics affecting the marketplace, unless there is no government in place. It's OK to have a government that is interested in neutrality and takes all reasonable precautions to ensure things remain free and fair for both the supply and demand sides of the marketplace. Yes, small committees will have some decisions to make, and yes, they would also be subject to possible corruption or bribery, but as long as the government stays roughly within its provisioned and proper sphere (and it's our job to ensure they do so), it shouldn't have such painful direct ramifications.

I was going to reply with the same thing rokhayakebe did. Regulation and government still exist in a free market. If the vendor intentionally misrepresents the contents of his product, he has committed fraud and should be held criminally liable. There's nothing fundamentally incompatible about a standards and testing body and the free market.

Free markets have rules to keep the playing field even and fair, and to prevent the balance of power from tipping too far in any one direction. A market is not free if it is impossible to enter due to monopolistic forces, and a market is not free if the consumers are mislead or otherwise deprived of the information needed to make an informed purchasing decision. Free markets are not anarchy.
> Not when that "one toolkit" is worse.

Here it's the case of "worse because it wasn't made better", not because it can't be better. That's my point. So difference in approaches with this subject like between AMD and Apple shows who cares about making it better and who cares about locking developers into their platform.
Remember FAST: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAST_(stroke)

First 3 minutes of the house episode Fetal Position (S3 E17) demonstrate it.
> Is uselessd actually an elaborate false flag operation by Red Hat to discredit their opponents and install a New World Order?

> ...Fuck.

I loled
Darn - I'm still mad about Intel's TSX-HTM bug[0]. I really wanted to compile this and play with it.

[0] - http://techreport.com/news/26911/errata-prompts-intel-to-dis...
Are there usage statistics showing which is more popular? I've never even heard of XEmacs until just now.
I'm pretty sure there are still new users adopting GNU Emacs as their text editor.
Not sure what this has got to do with programming?