skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Another article from the author helped clarify the points being made in the original article:

https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity

A gist of the argument:

1. Companies with large profits are spending an enormous amount of money on open market stock buy backs.

2. Buy backs are almost exclusively done for stock manipulation reasons: to stabilize or increase the value of a stock.

3. Most executive compensation is in the form of stock. So the incentive of management is to maximize stock value.

4. Instead, management should be incentivized to engage in activities that increase reinvestment, research, and development. Of which longer-term, more stable employment is one positive effect; increasing U.S. innovation and inventions is another.

My own amateur take on #2 is that it's popular because it's a non-risky, conservative action that management can take. If Company X has a billion dollar profit, spending that on open market buy backs of company stock effectively keeps the the profits within the company, without incurring a tax penalty. Combined with the stabilizing effect on stock prices makes it a no-brainer for many.

Also, having a profit doesn't justify increasing R&D spending, or automatically expanding into new markets. It's only wise to risk an expansion if you have confidence it will generate a return. The author conflates government spending (which is unbound by risk) with private spending (which necessarily must be bound by risk). A billion dollar publicly funded research project that results in no measurable return for society will not bankrupt the government. A risky, unwise, billion dollar private investment that does not generate a return can destroy a company.
Tineye also shows no hits on that image.

I was half-hoping that this image was somewhere...
> I suppose one could split the input into 72 byte chunks, hash each chunk and then combine again

This sounds like a recipe for screwing something up and opening yourself up to some kind of weird attack. I'm not enough of a crypto expert to know what the downside of this would be but it's more mucking around with crypto that I would be comfortable with.
Saab’s Soft Armour system offers protection against ballistic penetration
$2B Apple data center in Arizona
Decoding the Antikythera Mechanism (2012 documentary)
Twitter Aims to Lower Its Learning Curve by Automatically Filling Your Feed
No worries, plenty agree with you, but few fight the flood here on HN any longer. I never vote and rarely comment. The whole premise of comment voting is groupthink 3.0.

I cherish down-votes on HN, just like I cherish disagreeing with the idiocy that has plagued the progress of the US for decades, they'll keep swimming with the flow and wondering why things only get worse. It's like being the stern of the boat and wondering why wherever the country has been is shit, and looking at the bow as being to blame. You'll all get your turn at the bow of the ship, and I promise you it'll be far worse than your parents or grandparents.
Open Sourcing My Java Social Network Aggregator Tool
I'd agree, that doesn't sound right at all. Perhaps they meant doubling the size of the balloon? Doubling the diameter of a sphere indeed increases its volume many times more than double.
Sure.. except, nature has conveniently put those elements into forms we can use. So until we're able to do that ourselves, that's a disadvantage we'll have to deal with. It's less a failure of imagination, and more a failure of our current level of technology.
Debunking the widening gap between public perception and scientific consensus
So out of curiosity, what are some studies indicating educational benefits of clipart on worksheets?

By which of course I am referring to studies that indicate significant educational benefits of clipart on worksheets independently of the underlying educational benefits of worksheets in general.
شركة تنظيف مسابح بالخرج
This is essential-- mods already have way too much power, and are constantly found to be doing naughty things on a very reliable basis. Selling sidebar links, keeping funds from "charity drives", squashing certain domains, outright selling mod accounts to industry marketers (/r/android) and these are just the things we know about! Moderator powers need to be restricted with constant vigilance by the admins and community.

Adding the potential for monetary rewards will not move this problem in the correct direction.
Water, phone, and, to a lesser degree, electricity, are all reasonable for the average person to understand. A shower obviously uses more water than a tap, and when it's off it uses none. A phone costs me minutes while it's off the hook and doesn't when it isn't. And I know about how long a minute is. Turning on my computer, lights, or microwave costs electricity (although I may not have a great idea of how much, I can make decent guesses to the ratios).

But do even the most tech-savvy have a reasonable intuition for how much bandwidth a computer uses while idle with a given set of applications running? How much a game of StarCraft uses? How much streaming video costs? (The last one is a trick question - it can change dynamically depending on your downstream speed.) It's just unreasonable to ask people to make good decisions about these things.
The Last 5 Years of Building a Custom-Made Mensware Brand
And then everybody would switch to this new and cheaper service. Then your website, which isn't on the list, wants a fast connection too. For a fee the ISP would gladly make your service faster. However, many could not afford this and would go out of business. This, ironically, would limit your "choice" on the other side.
It isn't exactly novel. Using the Windows Recovery Environment (however you get there) is exactly how this has been accomplished since the introduction of WinRE in Vista.
How did HBO compete with NBC? How do we have any channels besides PBS for that matter?

How does any paid app compete with any free app?

Why do we have netbooks when a a Raspberry Pi costs $35 and (the 2 at least) can do everything most consumers do on a computer?

Your question carries with it the assumption that an ISP should be responsible for ensuring the success of application and website developers. Would you make the analagous argument that cable (television) providers have a responsibility to ensure high production values of television shows? Would you argue that a road-crew is responsible for the quality of your destination? These are all means of accessing something, and the content you get via the means of access need not be the purview of the provider of the means of access.

Furthermore, my hypothetical is only to show a possible consequence of limiting the bargaining choices of multiple firms in a market with competition.

To go a bit broader, your question makes it clear that we have very different views on net neutrality. I view rate-limiting as entirely neutral. There is a price at which I would be happy to accept a rate-limited connection. There is also a ceiling at which I would not choose a completely unthrottled connection. I would not like a rate-limited connection to be my only choice, but depending on price, I would also not like a completely unthrottled connection to be my only choice. Ultimately, though, my stance comes down to choice. I want more choice. By limiting the terms which I may legally choose to enter into a contract with a service provider, I am made worse off.
Next-Gen OpenGL to Be Shown Off Next Month
Why We Don't Sell Ads
Forget Climategate: this 'global warming' scandal is much bigger
5 New Social Media Sites to Watch Out For!
I absolutely deny that the majority of those who do
are the 'intelligent supporters' you describe.

Of course, the typical person is dumb.

Similarly, the typical evolutionist and typical global-warming guy or pro-vaccines is also dumb. They just happen to be correct on the issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

Sturgeon's Law. 90% of everything #%$#. 90% of creationists are dumb, for the same reason that 90% of the population in general (including evolutionists) are dumb.

Have you ever argued with your own supporters? Playing the devil's advocate is pretty fun. The typical evolutionist can't even counter-argue against criticisms against Carbon Dating... or other simple fallacious arguments with regards to evolution.

Carbon Dating has a maximum effectivity of a few thousand years, not really long enough to be on the scale of evolutionary changes. Simple geological facts, for depth of fossils and such can also be contested, and the typical pro-evolution person out there will be lost in the argument.

Despite being on the correct side of the debate, pro-evolutionists typically can't argue their way out of a paper-bag. But this is true in general, very few people have decent debate skills.

And thats what makes "intelligent people with wrong worldviews" so dangerous. They win every argument in colloquial settings, because they're pretty smart and can win debates even when the facts are tilted against their favor.

The realization that I myself might be one such person is not lost upon me of course. I generally win debates online, in person and such. But after years of experience, I've learned that this isn't because I'm correct... its because I am a decent debater.

And everyone who posts in online discussions tends to be an above-average debater. We constantly debate each other and organize our own (and each other's) thoughts.
If you don't want "stock buybacks", do not print money.

The Federal Reserve prints money(Qualitative Easings) for big companies and Governments, and of course companies buy their own stock with their cheap money. Government buy back their own bonds.

Basically they are taking wealth from little savers and giving it to big Government and big companies, in one of the biggest transfer of wealth ever, making the people at the top 1% have a bigger and bigger share of the wealth.

It is not a problem of big companies,but a problem of the Government distortion of the financial world for their benefit(because they are basically broke).

The "lending of last resort" has become the first and normal way of financing for them.

Of course, there are always people that believe, like this man, that the solution is always Central Planning, more Government and more taxes.
This is disappointing, especially since our local RadioShack has recently added a ton of great hobbyist electronics: They carry RaspberryPi starter kits, 4 models of Arduino, Beaglebones, about 8 kinds of shields, tons of robot kits, littleBits, and the usual drawers of random parts. I picked up an Arduino-compatible camera board for $12 on clearance.

I have no idea how big the local market for cool, modern electronics stuff might be. And I'll be sad if it disappears. But it would be nice if somebody could make a business out of this.

But it you haven't checked out your local RadioShark in the last few years, it might be worth a look.
> reentry into an atmosphere in a deep gravity well and rendezvousing with an aerostat.

What about rendezvous of a rotating tether with a hypersonic craft? We can make cables now that are strong enough to support a "rotorvator" rotating tether at the lengths required. What about very large, very long, aerostat facilities that are mostly huge electromagnetic cannon for launching robot hypersonic craft? These could be built to withstand 1000's of gravities, to allow ballistic launch from high altitiude facilities, but have a return flight profile suitable for passengers and other fragile cargo. We could also have Venusian hybrid jet/rocket hypersonic craft that are fueled with liquid carbon monoxide. This technology could mean that getting to the colonized Venusian ecosphere would be a lot cheaper than getting off of it, if you are a biologically standard Homo sapiens.

EDIT: So, how this would play out in a cyberpunk space opry: Many people choose to emigrate to Venus because of the price of labor there. However, economic pressures cause a large fraction of the Venusian populace to undergo radical cybernetic modification, because it opens up job opportunities on the hostile surface and makes it less expensive to get back to Earth and other parts of the Solar System. This pathway is chosen by desperate and marginal people, who often take advantage of the radical modification surgery to shed their old identities. Voila! Gritty Sci-Fi cyberpunk future based on chemistry, physics, and economics.

EDIT: It turns out that the energy cost for getting between Mercury and Venus isn't so large. Also, there are a good number of Venus-crossing asteroids. So anything you can get from a carbonaceous chondrite asteroid shouldn't be precious to the point of rarity on Venus. Among other things, both silicon and hydrocarbons could be mined in industrial quantities.

EDIT: An interesting Selenian Boondocks blog post about the chemistry and physics of extracting various resources out of the Venusian atmosphere at human-aerostat altitudes! http://selenianboondocks.com/2013/12/venus-isru-condenseable...

EDIT: An interesting idea for surface resource extraction -- bombard the surface with rocks from orbit, with the intention of creating clouds of dust which can be harvested by specially designed airships. Though this is inefficient materially, it might result in far less wear and tear on equipment, which gets to remain at higher and friendlier altitudes.

EDIT: Carbon monoxide and sulphuric acid can be used as a fuel/oxidizer pair in a rocket engine! Both can be condensed right out of the Venusian atmosphere. Granted, these are a bit cantankerous even as far as rocket fuels go.
Haha, does not improve the conversation according to you because? Is incorrect because? Close minded because? Misleads people from the truth only you know? You should pull your head out...
Senior Software Engineer – Web Bigcommerce
My experience in a suburban area is relatively similar. I wouldn't be surprised if what it really came down to was that people started streaming video from Netflix, Hulu etc... and simply put, the cable companies have less than zero incentive to optimize that experience.
"What you need to know about Cron. News at 0 22 * * 1-5."
There's lots you can do to detect "false inputs" like this. How hard this behavior is policed is based on how badly Apple cares about this problem.

All evidence points to Apple not really caring about abuse of this variety, so the obfuscation needed to pass any filters are pretty basic.
I seem to be getting that at about 30% of the sites I go to today.
And modern electronics shops now are packed with dedicated hobbyists.... small but loyal clientele. Radio Shack has always overreached.
I've very rarely seen a constraint that meaningfully reduced the password space.

No 2 identical characters in a row is a terrible constraint.

No more than 2 identical characters in a row is a reasonable constraint.

No more than 3 is a really good constraint.
"different forms for different purposes" -- no it's not, it's all bytes. The ISP should not care or know what the purpose of those bytes are. The same way the electric company doesn't care what I plug into my outlets.
You wouldn't need iOS, you could do it perfectly fine in iTunes on Windows or OS X.
What, the "obvious" reason that you could always choose to not defend yourself against Facebook's accusation? The very last clause of the license has almost exactly the effect implied by the original title, which presupposes only that Facebook has patents covering React with which to prevent your use without a patent license.
I find that mildly annoying :)

The Papaya page on Wikipedia mentions the use of the name pawpaw.
Some back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that first number is in the right ballpark. From [0], the lift generated by helium vs Earth air at STP is approx. 1.03 g/L. This suggests a lift of approx. 590,000 short tons on Earth:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28%28%28%284%2F3%29+*+...

Then, if we assume that the gravity on Venus is 90% of Earth standard, you get about 656,000 short tons of lift. Note that this doesn't take into account the different air density on Venus.

No idea about the "doubling" bit, though :-P

[0]: http://www.chem.hawaii.edu/uham/lift.html
It isn't possible to render shadow maps in parallel in dx12 I believe.
This came up recently in the context of type systems and the "what color is your function" article (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8984648), and it seemed worth posting separately for the sake of discussion.

The history of Hungarian notion seems interesting. It's a workaround for insufficient type systems, but a rather reasonable one for a large legacy code base that didn't have the option of switching to a better language with a better type system.

More importantly, the concept of making your intuitive sense of "rightness" and "wrongness" align with semantic correctness and incorrectness makes perfect sense. Type systems then let you convince the compiler to go along with that. On Rusty Russell's "hard to misuse" scale, a good type system can raise your code from "The name tells you how to use it." (and in some cases "The obvious use is (probably) the correct one.", as with the SFromUs function in the article) to "The compiler/linker won't let you get it wrong."
Some of the suggestions are bad. Why they are enforcing English characters? Like a-z? For example in Github I write щ and then it wants me to write a lowercase letter. WTF? It is lowercase! And more secure than an English letter!
Crimea
Does Skype still work there? ,I've read that it will stop working on February 1st
And a pen.
The cracking scene, demo scene, and games industry were all built long before Windows. C64, Amiga, ZX Spectrum, Atari.

I think it's important we had a generation of instant-on machines that greeted a user with a command prompt and a programming environment. Even if you wanted to just play a game, you still found yourself LOADing, DIRing, SYSing, and maybe performing a soft-reset after a LOAD that triggered a system routine that now pointed somewhere else. There are things you'd learn after hours of playing and messing with games because, eventually, typing all this weird stuff at a command prompt made you wonder "how" or "what if". The metal and its registers and special calls were right there and you couldn't brick your machine in any way a cold boot couldn't fix, so next thing you know, your friend shows you if he POKEs this and then SYSes that, he could change the background color of the load screen. Cool. So now you need to one-up him so you spend a weekend messing around with NO TOOLS -- just a CLI -- and figure out if you POKE these other four places after LOADING and then SYS then you get unlimited lives. Of course the game crashing after a minute. And so it goes. But breaking things was encouraged because you'd instantly cold-boot and try again.

I think we owe a huge debt to instant-on machines with a command prompt and some environment (BASIC or a hex monitor or, today, bash with root on Linux and maybe Python or whatever). Any project that tries to put environments like that into kids hands again gets my vote. Windows... less so.
We don't know anything about what 3/8g does to the human body.
don't tell alexis what to do
I think this is simple advice and often incorrect.

For example: JIRA, it's very complicated software. Many of the complicated features I think are essential for it to get into the Enterprise market. Revenues $242 million.

Basecamp: Their mantra is simplicity (although they do not actually do just one thing, they have several features as part of their software). Revenues estimated at over $100 million.

I do no think there is one simple answer to how to build a successful startup. Focusing on being great at one thing might be a good idea for some businesses but it's not only way to do things and it's far from proven as "the" way to build a startup.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/atlassian_sales_leap_as_reve...
https://medium.com/@hungrycharles/basecamp-the-small-bootstr...
I am currently in between jobs. I spent most of my time catching up on TV shows, Movies and learning dancing.
I am a 3d dev and this article makes my head hurt. It has a bit of right and a lot of wrong.
I've heard phrases like "the science is settled" on global warming. If you can't write down a VERY detailed model on global warming, then it seems to me pretty arrogant to suggest that in fact "the science is settled." The fact that "Big Tobacco" hid behind that argument doesn't make it wrong! That kind of thinking isn't terribly sound, all kinds of folks use various argumentation strategies to advance various theories; not all of them are right. By your logic that should eliminate all argumentation strategies from all pursuits because all have been used in service of incorrect ideas. Since this is an obviously ridiculous conclusion I would instead assume that your maxim isn't valid.

Experts have been wrong in the past and will be again in the future. Economists -- whose sole job it is to understand the economy -- do no better than chance at predicting what will happen to GDP. You're making an appeal to authority and it's not terribly convincing. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-04/economic-forecasts-no-...

The science is largely settled on gravity and we've got an equation that tells us how it works in excruciating detail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation#Newton.27s_theory_o...

When climate science reaches that level of predictive ability then it won't be terribly contentious to say that the science is settled. Until then, it may well be.
It's quite probable if someone is manually entering ratings on hundreds of phones, that the owner of the phones is not the same person doing the labor.

Is there a reason that you think she, in particular, would make money using a synth app on those phones, versus anyone else?
DSL was covered under Title II until wireline ISPs in general were ruled as an "information service" rather than a "telecommunication service" by the FCC in 2005 in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in NCTA v. Brand X upholding the FCC's earlier (2002) declaratory ruling finding that Cable modem internet access was an "information service".

See, for instance, http://www.techlawjournal.com/topstories/2005/20050805a.asp
It does at the moment. Some of our external developers are located there which is now beginning to be a problem but Skype hasn't had any issue so far.
In case you're curious about the downvotes, it's probably because anyone who has ever done engine programming will laugh about your assertion that "as a FPS gamer" you know anything relevant about graphics rendering and technology.

It's like somebody claiming they can comment meaningfully on light bulb manufacturing standards because they've seen the lighting in a bunch of made-for-TV specials.
I do not feel dishonest calling 40Mbps similar to 50Mbps[0]. This is limited based on proximity to the provider. I live in Minneapolis proper, so this is an option for me. DSL can scale up to 1Gbps[1].

[0]http://www.centurylink.com/home/internetonly/
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_subscriber_line
I have been thinking about this for a while now too.

I feel more troubled by the fact that folks in non-AI field don't see this as an imminent problem. They don't realize that with current advances in computing power that enables us to store more and more data cheaply, how much can be learnt from it and how much can be automated.

There don't seem to be any easy solutions. Training/teaching folks new skills would help but will not solve this for every person affected. I suspect the collateral damage from this will be big.