skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this sentiment comes from the notion that employers should be the basis of the social safety net, which I find odd. Employers will never fully serve this role. It's relying on organizations (corporations usually) to make the trade off between profit and employee well being, two things that are almost always at odds.

It seems to me that it shouldn't matter where your income comes from, the social safety net should be there regardless. The ACA was a step in that direction by requiring people self insure if the did not get that benefit from their employer. I think we need to go even further and separate safety net benefits from employers. Then people would be able to choose whether they want the job security of a W-2 position or if they prefer the flexibility of a 1099 position without having to sacrifice the safety net.

(Side note: I'm a 1099 contractor who self insures. I have a lot of difficulty imagining going back to a W-2 job.)
I wonder if that will negate the 'clean' aspect of the whole deal.

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/21/313157701/why-those-tiny-micro...
Accepted by who? It's probably not the mainstream view (yet), but that's because there's a ton of misinformation out there about QM. For example, many people (even many physicists) think that the "measurement problem" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_problem) is still a problem. It isn't, and hasn't been for a very long time (decades). The reason people think it's still a problem is that the solution requires accepting the fact (and it is a fact) that classical reality isn't really real, it's just a very good approximation, and a lot of people are (understandably) resistant to that idea.
To be fair, I didn't hear the original anecdote. I'm only going off of the words in the post I responded to, but making people take an action to better your financial position is slavery.

From the description, the people being coerced could presumably choose not to take the action, but would then be denied entry to the bar. That is explicit tribalism and creates a situation where you either join along with the groupthink or you get cast back on to the streets.

Edit: If you can't refute or contribute, down-vote.
I teach high school math and science, and it's fun to meet these doubts head-on. Most students who carry these opinions opposing basic science are surprised to find that the ideas they've been opposing make perfect sense when you step away from sensationalism and examine what's actually being claimed.

I really enjoy leading students through a discussion of evolution in the context of bacteria. They all get that populations of bacteria develop a resistance to antibiotics over time, in a manner that we can watch play out. We name that 'evolution'. Then we look at the changes in a population of flies, which we can still watch. Then we step out to longer and longer timeframes, and recognize the same process taking place. By the time we get to evolution on the timeframe of millions of years, most students get it.
IMO, that would depend on the form the waste carbon is produced in, which would influence how it is disposed of. Taking a common hydrocarbon such as propane, and stripping all the hydrogens out of it will produce pure carbon. Last I checked, carbon tends to be a solid at standard pressure and temperature. AFAICT, the concern about carbon pollution is it ending up in the atmosphere in the form of gaseous compounds and messing with the complex feedback loops that regulate the climate. Solid carbon isn't going to do that very well.
She mentions her field of STEM (mechanical engineering) has a particularly low percentage of women among its members, and cites another site. On that site, there is this interesting list:

39% of chemists and material scientists are women;
27.9% of environmental scientists and geoscientists are women;
15.6% of chemical engineers are women;
12.1% of civil engineers are women;
8.3% of electrical and electronics engineers are women;
17.2% of industrial engineers are women; and
7.2% of mechanical engineers are women.

Does anyone have an explanation as to why chemists and material scientists have such a relatively high percentage of women?

The two highest are science, as opposed to engineering, so it could be that science in general is more women friendly than engineering, but even if we just look at the engineering disciplines on that list, there still is a big difference among them. Why would chemical engineering be much more women friendly than mechanical engineering?
Run this in your browser's JavaScript console:

socket.destroy()
How do you keep your startup team inspired?
Thought even more on this. Did not get a chance to run a simulation, but thought of it while driving around.

It finally jives with me that your odds at swap time are only 50%. Seems kind of obvious when you think of it as random events and you are at the end with it definitely behind one of two doors. Either door is clearly as likely. Now, your odds of getting to this point are vanishingly slim, the more doors there are. Which makes sense.

I think my intuitive block comes in in that your odds of winning the game are not increased in this scenario at all. Which, I knew. I think I even stated it at some point. Still a hard block to get around.
These are manpages http://imgur.com/a/JZfTr
Or politics is filled with lawyers because most politicians are legislators and their main job is to pass laws...
Unfortunately that's not an option for our (small) company. I'm already using gitlab.com for my own personal stuff, but for the company's, we have to stay on-premise.
You don't have to be that smart to be a programmer, and it takes less schooling than being a teacher requires.
I know, why not make it easier to use this container (just until everyone transitions) by embedding it into HTML with, say, a plugin?

Oh, right, thats Java, Flash, Silverlight, Unity Player, etc etc.
I'm not a unicorn, I'm a horse
> I mean, frankly, the USA consumer banking sector just doesn't need more cryptography-fueled gold-standard imitations, nor more ever-so-clever statistical models for mutual funds that blow up and die when their basic assumptions are violated by that chaotic monster of chaos known as "Reality", nor more ways for a banker to write a loan he knows won't be repaid and then escape the responsibility of eating his own damn losses when the borrowers can't repay. What it needs is to finally catch up with the rest of the world and let people send money via online banking, and receive their paychecks each month via direct deposit without two weeks' delay, and to not charge so many damned ATM and debit-card fees.

You said banking didn't need to be disrupted, and then you listed some very good reasons why it needs to be disrupted.

You seem to believe that regulatory barriers are affecting some other party than they actually are. The bankers you refer to are the beneficiaries of the regulations. With a few notable exceptions, they want these regulations to keep the competition out.

And to clarify, the companies and/or people I'm thinking of here aren't "crypto", or at least not Bitcoin-related. I agree that Bitcoin remains to risky for general consumer use.

(and by the way, "mortgages" are one of Warren's four big family expenses, which is definitely a financial product)
Give me a break with this garbage. The majority of the people on here are tech workers.
'degraded' ..
'dehumanized'...
The left? who the heck is that? Some days I'm right. Some days I'm center.

No one enjoys or will celebrate a homogeneous population in 2015. People want diversity.
Money is an amplifier that has diminishing returns.
Too much of it and you get white noise and foolishness.

It doesn't matter what your occupation or race is (you could be purple and grind stones for a living for all I care).

As for the google glass attacks, that highlights quite clearly the nature of the type of a-holes that have been created in the tech-sphere : I have money and I can do what I want no matter who it pisses off. Hello .. there is a real world out there and people will punch your lights out if you selfishly go about pissing them off w/o consideration.

The glasshole incidents reflect clearly on the types of jerks that are the new cream of the crop in the valley. What, you think you are so high and mighty that no one should dare knock you out for being a dick? Wake up and stop being snotty.
There is real nostalgia around cars, and that means gasoline/diesel engines.

Sure. And as a petrolhead, I will miss IC engines when they go. But it's a long leap from "implicit affection for IC engines" to "strategically presenting a build-to-fail engine technology to discredit alternative fuel".
Your only real solution here is to not rely on one service or one company's engineering. Had I been in OP's position, I'd have an rsync script set up on a server somewhere copying the important note somewhere else daily. Perhaps to a dedicated space on my personal machine, where I edit it. The script would perhaps send me an email or notification whenever it runs so I don't have to check it manually.

In practice I don't have single points of lifestyle failure. I learned my lesson after I locked myself out of my Gmail account out of stupidity. I was able to regain access through a nifty little trick, the account I'd set up to recover it from I'd stopped using a long time ago, but I was able to re-register it for the sole purpose of recovering my Gmail. Now I use LastPass but I have my Gmail password memorized. If I lose access to LastPass it's not the end of the world, I can still reset all my passwords.

You want rock-solid reliability without having to engineer it yourself? You're dreaming. The only service tailor-made for your needs is the one you build.
Believing a 409A has any meaning beyond satisfying the IRS/sarbox ass covering is, well, your business. In any case it applies at the instant the valuation is done; typically (for all the ones I've read / paid for) uses black scholes which rarely makes sense for an illiquid startup; and in any case has no relation to what you might get out of your option package, which is ultimately what matters, isn't it.

BTW for a private startup, RSUs are typically worse for the recipient than ISOs. Only at the odd unicorn might they start to make sense.

But whatever floats your boat -- if you want to try to put a dollar value on something ineffable, that's your business.
Only if the appliance is serving requests, not if it's requesting. For a piece of hardware like a carwash that is running servers, the manufacture should be maintaining that software routinely anyway.
The MIT license. What does it do?
There are arguably too many threads about the [MIT license][1] on the internet. What's worse is that most of them contradict each other or are at the very least misleading.

Let's try to figure it out together, shall we.

The license starts with a definition of the word "software." Specifically, it says that software isn't just code, but also "associated documentation files." Cool.

What follows is a detailed description of all the things you can do "without restriction, including without limitation." The things you're allowed to do are pretty much all the things. Cool.

In order to get to do all those things you need to satisfy a condition. The condition is to include the copyright notice and the permission notice in all copies. For the MIT license, that's pretty much everything but the disclaimer at the end. Cool.

All that seems pretty clear to me, and yet, you find comments like:

- You have to retain the original copyright.

- You aren't allowed to remove license comments from individual files.

- You aren't allowed to remove copyright notices from individual files.

The list keeps going. I'm sure you've read (hopefully not written) many of them yourself. I'd love to find out where these interpretations come from.

Assuming that I have a credits page* (not sure how you'd satisfy the condition without one) that includes the licenses, why wouldn't I be allowed to remove whatever I want from the code? "Without restriction" sounds unambiguous to me.

*If you're building native apps your "credits page" might be a directory hidden deep inside your app bundle.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License
Hydrogen is not itself a source of energy.

(The same can be said of both electricity and batteries)
As a source of materials it's also not very good. Most of the stuff is a finely mixed slag with hard-to-recover materials. All this from the bottom of a deep gravity well, deeper than that of Mars when we account for no atmosphere to slow you down. Asteroids are much better comparatively since you can have your pick at those that have concentrated materials of the sort you're looking for.
The threat to the car companies is that all-electric cars could dramatically decrease demand. They hope the complexity of fuel cells will keep demand going a few more decades.

An all-electric car could have as few as a hundred moving parts. A few motors and connecting rods, some suspension componants, fans and a couple manual controls. You just don't need the thousands of tiny metal bits necessary to keep a gas/diesel engine ticking over. Better yet, those parts you do need can be generic. Electric motors are nothing special, nor are batteries. Since they do not mechanically interact they don't need to be as engine/vehicle specific as parts today. Once EVs become the norm, and the teething problems of EVs are worked out, aftermarket replacements will be everywhere.

Build a car from non-rusting carbon fiber, fill it with easily replaceable generic parts, and you've got a recipe for vehicles lasting decades. THAT's what the car companies really fear.
> I'm not sure if anyone is working on making OCaml better to debug in gdb

Mark Shinwell is working on just this; he has a very impressive branch of OCaml which can do OCaml-level source backtraces in gdb; WIP tree is here for anyone who wants to glance at the patches: https://github.com/mshinwell/ocaml/compare/ocaml:4.02...4.02...

Also a nice talk from a couple of years ago by him on some tips and tricks for using gdb/OCaml: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2WpWnB-nk
> he said it's a requirement to get your foot in the door at corporate jobs. It is.

And I disagreed with him, which I think is okay. It's demonstrably not a requirement for all corporate jobs, so you can't make sweeping generalizations like that. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that you don't need a degree to work at companies like Citrix or Google, for example.
I agree, and it's one reason why we want to make a better dupe detection system. We did look at changing that particular behavior but it turned out to be hard to do in isolation.
OK, I was confused as to your specifying that it wasn't FMV. What you're describing I agree is the most useful value to use when thinking about this topic (but I think is also the FMV).
I had a crack at this. This is about the third Rust program i've ever written, so it's probably chock full of noob mistakes:

#![feature(std_misc)]
mod natural {
use std::num::Float;
use std::iter::IntoIterator;
use std::iter::FromIterator;
use std::cmp::Ord;
use std::cmp::Ordering;

#[derive(PartialEq, PartialOrd, Debug)]
pub struct Natural(f64);

impl Natural {
pub fn new(value: f64) -> Option<Natural> {
match value {
x if Float::is_nan(x) => None,
_ => Some(Natural(value))
}
}
pub fn new_all<'a, A: IntoIterator<Item=&'a f64>, B: FromIterator<Natural>>(values: A) -> B {
let b: B = values.into_iter().map(|f| Natural::new(*f).unwrap()).collect();
b
}
}

impl Eq for Natural {
}

impl Ord for Natural {
fn cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> Ordering {
self.partial_cmp(other).unwrap()
}
}
}

use natural::Natural;

fn main() {
let fs = [3.0, 1.0, 1.0];
let mut xs: Vec<Natural> = Natural::new_all(&fs);
println!("before = {:?}", xs);
xs.sort();
println!("after = {:?}", xs);
}

In particular, the assignment of the return value of new_all to a local is ugly, but i couldn't figure out how to please the type checker without it.
What I don't get is the mindset that refactoring is optional.

If I'd be the customer and people came to me to tell me "Of course we can do feature X but we also LIKE to do Y" what I hear is "We can do what you want for amount EUR x but we'd like to sell you something that costs EUR x+k".

So I'm not talking about the customer believing it's optional, I'm talking about the development teams themselves believing it's optional.

I't would sound a whole lot different to state "Sure we can do X. It's EUR x. This is what is necessary..." (the list of work packages would include refactoring, maybe worded in a way that is better understandable by my customers).

I'm going to spare you the the usual comparison to car makers or whatnot. I think the mistake is with ourselves to simply state that it is necessary and not optional to maintain quality. After all if you can take the risk of implementing features without maintaining a quality product isn't -- and thus loosing customers as implementing features only when maintaining quality -- and thus loosing customers to competitors who are willing to reduce quality for the other risk, and a possibly lower price for a single project or two?
We have a 65GB repository with many binaries in Perforce, it's expensive but works well.
Nearly all car trips are way under 300 miles. I believe the P95 trip distance (in the USA) is 30 miles each way. Most people can use an affordable pure-electric car such as the Leaf, e-Golf, or Fiat 500e for most trips. From a system optimization perspective, it's OK if some people (like you) always need the range of an internal combustion engine and everyone else switches to electric.
Somewhere around 20% of nurses in the United States belong to unions--some of which exert enormous political influence over the state and federal laws governing the other 80% working in an already highly-regulated market.

Collective bargaining and organized regulatory influence seem like potentially important contributors to the 'stability' of the profession and wage growth over time.
I thought that was this site. :)
A few:

- Being white
- Being middle class or wealthy
- Being well-dressed
- Not having a disability or mental illness or addiction
- Having many people with cameras trained on you and the police
- Having a home

Notice that many of those are not things under your direct control. Either you were born lucky enough to live a life mostly free of police violence, or you'll be subject to stop and frisk, regular harassment, probably jail time for minor crimes that wouldn't result in jail time for a wealthy white person, etc.

I've occasionally run interference with police at protests and when homeless folks were being harassed by cops because I fit the right stereotypes for not getting the crap beat out of me or getting arrested. I'm simply not the kind of person they harass or arrest, in general. The thought of arresting me or putting me in my place crossed their mind on occasion, I'm sure, but there were usually, maybe always, cameras rolling when these occasions arose. Many people aren't lucky enough to get through police interactions without harm.

Cops in the US are simply terrifying, and in many jurisdictions simply out of control. Not all the time, and not with all people (you could live your whole life without ever having a bad incident with a cop if you were born white/wealthy in America, so it's easy to be oblivious to this). I was oblivious for years...I read Reason magazine back then, and so I was aware of the deadly no-knock drug raids. But, the regulatory targeting of minorities to force them out of their homes and neighborhoods so that gentrification can proceed at will, the police targeting of the homeless and the mentally ill to make downtown districts more profitable for their owners, and drug enforcement only on the poorest in our communities, is the dirty little secret of "progressive" city governments.

My current home city, Austin, is allegedly quite progressive. And, yet, illegal camping (i.e. sleeping while homeless) can result in a $500 ticket, and APD regularly clears out homeless camps, arresting anyone with drugs.
This is part of a scurrilous campaign by green activists to get solar physicist, Dr. Willie Soon fired from his post at the Smithsonian Institute. This campaign was apparently triggered by his co-authorship of a paper critical of the predictive skill of climate models.

"Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model"

http://www.scibull.com:8080/EN/abstract/abstract509579.shtml...

Hacker news is not a venue for rent-a-mob activity. Flagged.
I only lost my data once but that was enough. My note got stuck in a sync conflict.

Support was unwilling to help me get the data out of the transmit queue... they actually told me to make sure to save my note before moving to another device. I guess I was the first user to forget that. They never apologized for their bug and I was a paid user back then.
For one, because they see Tesla as "winning" this "paradigm shift in cars", which could be (will be, in my opinion) just as disruptive as Apple's touchscreen was to the former cellphone industry.

In such a situation having the paradigm shift happen in the first place is bad news for you, especially if you're a leader of the old paradigm. Microsoft, RIM and Nokia were all laughing off the iPhone in the first few years, so people would stay away from them and keep buying their "old stuff".

So yeah, I can very much see how companies like Toyota and whoever else is promoting the totally unworkable fuel cell car "revolution" would be in bed with the oil industry. They'd rather push for something that barely changes the status quo, but at the same time is seen as "revolutionary" in the media, than go into electric cars.
You know what. Criticisms and thoughts of this article aside, I do love thinking about problems, and solving problems.

I feel gratified to get the jump from looping -> halting problem, (though the author obviously telegraphed it), and though I found the implementation he provided to be a touch over engineered, I did enjoy walking through with him.

I agree with the majority of HN, but to be candid, I think I would of enjoyed being in Christine spot.
For one example: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?dist=unstable;...

I haven't compared this with upstream though.
There are a few libraries out there; Async_parallel is one: https://blogs.janestreet.com/async-parallel/

Lwt also has the Release framework which does multiprocess: https://github.com/andrenth/release

and more if you search through OPAM.
"Isn't using any hydrocarbon going to give you the issue with pollution that gasoline does"

Not really. A fuel cell converts an hydrocarbon to C02. That's it.

A thermal engine like a diesel creates particles like this:
http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/airtox/diesel.html

And the high temperatures creates nitrogen oxides that create acid rain.

When you start a car, the catalyst converter needs 5 to 10 minutes to get enough temperature for starting to work.
I've been writing TypeScript exclusively for so long, I forget most devs are still using the old syntax.
We know that hydrogen has obstacles when it comes to efficiency... but we also know that batteries have obstacles when it comes to chemical environmental friendliness (primarily manufacture and disposal). Has anyone done a comparison of that aspect of environmental impact?
If I get the point of the article, the author would argue that cpp provides some form of closure (you can code a macro that generates a function that behaves somewhat like a closure if you want...)