skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If one employee sexually harasses another employee in a one-off incident, maybe it's an exception and not a culture of sexism.

If it's one executive, that executive is contributing to a culture of sexism - though it's possible he's just the bad apple spoiling the barrel, and maybe there is no broader problem, and the problem can still be easily nipped in the bud.

The smoking gun lies in Google's response to the incident. When HR backs up sexual harassment of employees by their bosses, that makes a strong case that there is a systemic cultural problem that goes beyond the influence of one executive, and won't be fixed just by firing one executive.

That's the real story here. Not even the incident, not really the executive, and certainly not the employee, but Google's response. When HR's own response isn't appropriate, that does become an issue for the public.
Ask HN: I Need Help with a Combinatorics Problem
EDIT: This is not a homework problem and I'm not looking for answers - I'm simply looking for better ways to approach this problem.

I have a budget and a list of prices of items that need to be purchased. I need to buy the combination of items that will get me as close to my budget, without going over the budget, as possible.

Example:

Budget = 542

Prices_of_Items = [100,100,400,23,64,39,18,39,29,39,28]

Best Combination = [400,100,23,18] (sum == 541)

How do I find the best combination of items to buy that will have a sum of less than or equal to my budget?

My actual problem consists of a Price_of_Items list that is typically, at least, 70 items long and I have to compute the "best" combination of prices for over 1,500 scenarios. I know I can brute force this problem, but using Python, brute force would take tens, if not hundreds of hours to complete. Does anyone know of any suggestions to how I could approach this problem if I did not want to brute force it? Mathematical solutions or suggestions using Python and/or R are very welcome!
Right...they sure are, and I know from direct experience.

However, paid defense lawyers sure get a nice dividend from these recidivists.

Cops get the jobs, status, and power they seek from arresting them.

The prison industrial complex owes it's entire business model to them (as first-timers rarely get state prison time), and the last time I checked, DOC was the largest state budget item for CA and FL (I'll admit to maybe being a little off here)

Need I go on?
If you count all from Turkish descent in Berlin, then that would be 6%. Most are 'white'.
I remember the reason given at the time. The capabilities of your military radars are mostly a secret, and by revealing that they were able to spot the airplane so far away, they were telling a lot of information to the other regional powers.
How to Do Research in the MIT AI Lab
Try to do something unique next time.
Exactly. Even people who fly a lot (like me) are in the confines of what feels like a very controlled system. If I can get three connecting flights across two continents with only two hours of layover, how can we just lose a plane?

It's easy to forget the world is really big, and that technology does break.
My experience was similar to his in one respect, specifically the quote that suggests he first had a fairly normal life when he went to grad school at age 17. I left home for the first time to go to college at age 16, specifically graduate school in mathematics at Harvard. In retrospect, it seems to have been a fairly normal experience in leaving home and going to college.

It helped me that I was friends with Ran Donagi (started in my department at age 17, had the office next to mine, and accepted my invitation to be my roommate), and that Ofer Gabber (started grad school at 16) was around in the next dorm room to the right, being even more awkward than I was. (At least I didn't have a language barrier ...)
I have to ask - any stories you can tell?
That seemed unprofessional to me too.

But the problem for debian is that Jessie is frozen, they can't make any changes now. They don't want an exception for this.
> I could probably put together a list of 10-20 Wikipedia articles and Khan videos that, if you were to read and watch until you understood, would cover you for the vast bulk of CS-related questions you're likely to hit in an interview.

I'd like to see a list like that!
But it's not a business and that person wasn't a customer. Debian is a community, bound partially by common technical ideas about packaging, stability and security, and partially by philosophical ideas about Free software.

Their goal is not to satisfy everyone who comes to their mailing list, that would be insanity.
Well, white and European descent is quite common in Berlin and Germany. That's much of the population there and around. Still, there will be some diversity with people from many European countries, since EU members can move freely in the EU and can easily work in other members states.

Not many women in German software companies is also quite common, unfortunately.
if they have lots of foreigners and work for an international market, yes.
Queen Elizabeth's death will be the most disruptive UK event in 70 years
Two points: first, there's an inherently unequal balance of power in the employment relationship, and it favors the employer. This has been recognized going back to Adam Smith if not before, quote from An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations below.

Second: the "right" to a job (or not) exists (or doesn't) because that's how the relationship's been defined in law. Law to which, again, employers have an unequal access vis a vis employees. And such relationships aren't recognized in other contexts. If you bring a child into the world, you cannot shirk your obligations to that child (unless you ensure, through adoption, etc., that they're otherwise met). It's quite possible to envision a regime in which employers do assume a responsibility for their employees.

On Smith:

"What are the common wages of labour, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little, as possible. The former are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to lower, the wages of labour.

"It is not, however, difficult to foresee which of the two parties must, upon all ordinary occasions, have the advantage in the dispute, and force the other into a compliance with their terms. The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily: and the law, besides, authorises, or at least does not prohibit, their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work, but many against combining to raise it. In all such disputes, the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, or merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks, which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year, without employment. In the long run, the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him; but the necessity is not so immediate.

"We rarely hear, it has been said, of the combinations of masters, though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and everywhere in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform, combination, not to raise the wages of labour above their actual rate. To violate this combination is everywhere a most unpopular action, and a sort of reproach to a master among his neighbours and equals."

Book I, Chapter IV, "Of the Wages of Labour"

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3300
Why is the willingness of people to pay a lot of money for something because they like its texture or color and more "extrinsic value" than the willingness of people to pay a lot of money for something because they like its corrosion resistance?
Dan Ariely: Are we in control of our own decisions?
How New Relic Took Off
That's why I thought of 16Gb Ram. I'm thinking, The whole of XCode and the compiler and my program source would be in the buffer cache. So after the initial loading from disk, the dev experience would be quite smooth (that's the guess I'm making).
Come on, no need to compare programmer hygiene to that of dogs... you'll upset some dogs :-P
Yes, symbols that are garbage collected will get new object IDs if they appear again.

https://gist.github.com/mboeh/83338a4e3a6a77689e22
As I commented above, see the direct documented evidence out of Ferguson, MO regards arrest and conviction rates for blacks vs. whites.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9164772
To be fair Google's whole business model is based on spying on people to gather data for ad placement. If we're being entirely honest a browser which sends every url you visit to Google by default is spyware.
Usually when I read an article about somebody I know, I don't learn much. This one was an exception.

Kudos to Jeff for opening the kimono. It wasn't required of him; the cone of silence around his issues was, as it should have been, quite effective.
Notifications and Alerts
It is very off topic too.
You should re-read this and imagine Goldman's messages being read in Vizzini's voice.
Ok, this caused lots of discussion, so here it is.

I am Mexican, living and working in Mexico. Interest rates for a house are in the ballpark of 10%. This can be either very bad (on a 30 year mortage, you end up paying back about 3 times as much as you originally borrowed), or very good (early payments go straight to capital and have a disproportionate effect on the total amount paid, specially during the first few years). We also have a government mandatory housing fund, paid by your employer, at 5% of your salary (meaning everybody's salary is 5% less than what otherwise would be, but still).

So, we did the rational thing. We rented while we were young and our careers were taking off, we tried to avoid lifestyle inflation when we got raises, and when we finally bought a house we threw every spare cash we could afford until the monthly interest came out of our employers fully. That happened last December (after sinking Christmas bonuses into the mortage).

So, while it requires discipline, it's not that impressive. In this country, paying your mortage using the plan designed by the bank is the same as making minium payments to your credit card. You just keep paying interests without making much of a dent on the capital.
Wow that's extreme.
They could broadcast seccomp across thread for older kernels.

One day it's going to be "use Google's fork of the kernel".

Of course, Firefox and others work fine on "older" kernels.
setInterval(function(){$(".zero.button").click()}, 10);
First, I'll note that plenty of people use Chrome without extensions. This issue wasn't a showstopper for any of them.

Second, you cut out the rest of the comment:

"If that causes great hardship for anyone and you want to do the work to figure out what's going on submit patches to fix it, I can provide pointers for where to start looking and code reviews for the patch."

Since that comment has anyone done anything other than updating their kernel and/or complaining? If not, why would the Chromium team think this issue was important?
The "guaranteed neutral" service is a superset of the other service. You're complaining that you can't buy something when the reality is that you can't not buy something, which is different.

> This new federally-mandated kind of service, as it meets extra legal constraints and prevents certain kinds of side-payments from happening, is almost certainly going to be more expensive and available from a smaller set of fewer, larger providers.

You're talking like there is some kind of vigorous competition going on at present which is going to be impeded. And the side payments you're talking about don't make things cost less, they interfere with competition in other markets that actually are competitive, which would ultimately make things cost more.

> Title II/common-carrier regulation does nothing to create new provider competition, but rather assumes that monopoly is the only possibility and cements it into place.

That's because it is. Utilities are natural monopolies. The duopoly that was created by accident when telephone and cable TV both merged into internet has been a disaster.

The bulk of a last mile ISP's costs are based on the area they offer service in rather than the number of customers they have. A strand of fiber costs the same amount to install and maintain whether it carries the traffic of 100 customers or 200. That means if you want to have two ISPs you would have to pay almost twice as much for internet service at the same level of ISP infrastructure investment and profits because each ISP would have to cover all the same costs with half as many customers. If you want to talk about what makes things cost more, it's trying to "create competition" in a natural monopoly market.

A utility isn't a natural monopoly because the government said so, it's a natural monopoly because adding competition makes prices go up.
Google invented sandboxing in client apps? I don't know who's more arrogant - Google or their fawning fanboys.
Duck typing generally refers exclusively to runtime type checking (i.e. dynamically-typed languages). What Go does is structural typing.
Design Lessons from the Culinary World
Men can try (and take their lumps along with the women trying to do something about these problems). But there are some fundamental cultural splits across which men certainly don't listen to each other. For many, it matters much less whether I am male and much more what religion I observe.

In some subcultures, and cultures, it really is considered the woman's fault if a man feels inclined to harass her (or rape her, as the case may be). I can't sympathetically reach people who stick firmly to these views and are reinforced by large numbers of other people who reject all my arguments and fundamentally reject me, because they just don't share any part of my worldview, we have completely different values. They have me encoded as a threat to tradition, or a nonbeliever, or as not a real man, or as a cultural imperialist, and they just don't want to hear anything I have to say about this.

I can confront these people, and that may carry a certain amount of satisfaction for me, but that sort of confrontation rarely convinces anybody.

In that case maybe we need to stop thinking we are always going to get people to listen to us. What is a rational response to that realization?
Only on Vista and later though.
"Trash talking is, unfortunately part of how multiplayer games are played now, "

Have you considered that it doesn't have to be that way.
it synchronize all the process's threads to use the same seccomp filter (seccomp being a sandbox mechanism - a bit like a firewall for system calls).

Threads on Linux are very close to an equivalent of "separate process" except they share memory. Up to until seccomp tsync, only the thread calling seccomp and it's children would get the seccomp filter.

If you wanted to have seccomp in previously started threads you'd have to handle a broadcast in userspace and ensure all threads actually apply the same seccomp filter.

I bet they ran into issues with that (it's easy to forget a thread or have a new thread someone elses coded that will fail to apply the filter).

tsync is kernel side and explicitly fails/succeeds so its both simpler and safer.
> If Goldman wants his file to be random, any random file should do. Why does he want exactly his own random file?

Maybe because the file was XOR'd with a secret one time pad?
"And yes, counting from zero is slightly more efficient than starting at 1. Computers are built on a 0 and 1 numbering system that makes up everything (hello binary!). Counting from 0, is just easier and creates efficiency."

Um... yeah. Who wrote this exactly? An actual programmer? And what does binary have to do with it? I am a fan of 0-indexing, don't get me wrong, but certainly we don't do it for the sake of efficiency. If anyone knows better let me know, but as far as I am aware it has much more to do with a more natural expression of a set, as well as dealing with pointers whose first element lies 0 elements away.
Agree that it's not a great article.

The wikipedia article [1] might help with some of your questions.

And this article [2] talks about their prospects in Australia.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_solar_farm

[2] http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/community-groups-look-to-cro...
Chrome certainly didn't pioneer anything. Google devs brought seccomp-bpf to the kernel, which is a simpler alternative (but also not always as useable) to many other mechanisms.

Chrome is one of the first products on linux with a large amount of users to support a reasonably strong sandbox. But that's not what pioneering means.

Of course, seccomp-nonbpf, selinux and quite a few other mechanisms have been around for a longer while. In non-Linux kernels in fact, there are FAR more secure mechanisms (but also, they don't run Linux binaries..)
> completely baseless conclusion that the multiple files would be considered purely based on their file size

You mean, like...

> I meant can I send you a compressor and several compressed files whose total file size is less than the original uncompressed file and from which I can regenerate the original uncompressed file.

(to which Mike agreed)?
So you believe that a presentation can be identified with a gender?
Duck typing is more of a technique than a quality of a language. Any dynamically-typed language is going to end up having some code that does runtime type checking. Duck typing just means doing respond_to? instead of :kind_of? when doing so.

Ruby is certainly a language suitable for the duck typing technique. The term was originally used in reference to Python, and both languages have reasonably equivalent reflection abilities.
But there's still a bootstrap issue? If mr. evil is mitm me, before I can start namecoind [ed: for the first time] -- I need to bootstrap into the block? (This isn't entirely hypothetical, think running dnscoin on a laptop for local resolving, and you don't trust your home ISP).

But I assume you can bootstrap with the usual methods (eg: your OS come with the cert of at least once CA you trust, so you can use tls/ssl, or you can connect to a known, trusted ssh host etc).
> that you could fit the gunzip binary in the reduced space

What's funny is that Patrick (the challenger) asked if a bash script consisting solely of a call to gunzip would suffice as the decompressor. In other words, all he had to do was compress the file by more than the amount of the script. Mike allowed it, knowing that even a tiny "decompressor" that really just called out to the real thing, would still be larger than the compression achievable on a well-crafted random blob.
Connect. Create. Celebrate women in technology
Calling comex a "fawning fanboy"? That's ballsy for a throwaway account.
You believe.

And that's exactly why people died for principles such as innocent until proven guilty. Regardless of the cause.
Heck, if people didn't believe stuff at random we'd have far less wars.
Not really. You have to see the supreme irony in a company which is ditching suppport for very recent kernels in the name of security when the app in question is designed primarily to spy on your browsing habits (and ensure that you favour their search and mail products, which exist purely to make money from ads based on their spying).
This is extremely slick. Nice job!
I wonder if any distro's Chromium package had a patch.
For some reason, Chrome seems to work fine with extensions on my Ubuntu 14.04, kernel 3.13.

I agree with those saying this is completely stupid. In corporate environments, there are a lot of Ubuntu LTS, RHEL, and CentOS desktops. They won't be upgraded to >= 3.16 for years.

Edit: oh, wait, this starts in the next version.
>If Goldman wants his file to be random, any random file should do. Why does he want exactly his own random file?

Because not all random files are equally random? DUH! He had to ensure there's no bias in the distrubution, use a good random generation, check for skewed data etc...
Put a cat in a context in which it's subject to the authority of another entity and that specific cat might well find that it is expected to behave in a specific way toward mice -- either to kill them or not. And that the cat might be rewarded and/or sanctioned based on that activity. I'm not arguing that this is a legal context, but that rights and obligations exist within a power and control context, which might or might not exist.

Regards C-W, your quoted passage states specifically "unless in respect of our own citizens". Which is to say that U.S. law, under C-W, can specifically govern the actions of the US and/or its citizens.

The recent record also seems clouded. There have been individuals whose extradition to the US has been sought (or secured) for actions occurring principally or totally outside the U.S. The case of Manuel Noriega comes to mind:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega#Criminal_prosecu...

"In April 1992 a trial was held in Miami, Florida, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in which Noriega was tried and convicted on eight counts of drug trafficking, racketeering, and money laundering."

There's also Executive Order 12333 2.11:

"No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/execut...

http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/11/04/us.assassination.policy/in...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12333

Further, your use of C-W doesn't support your previous statement: "[The Constitution] does not limit what the United States can do abroad". It simply states that there do exist powers which, even if not explicitly listed in the Constitution, would exist. Not that the Constitution could not specify, define, and/or limit such powers.

Which in fact it does -- the United States cannot engage willy-nilly in international agreements with other nations, or engage in acts of war. Both of these require specific actions of affirmation vested in the Legislature: Declaration of War by the full Congress, treaty approval by the Senate.
Why would he get blowback for that tweet? How is it inartfully put?
Err, in their developer office the desired attributes are "can write C++", "debugging" and "spends time burried in code"...

So back-licking is not that big of an asset.

That said, I've heard that ass-kissing can get you places in some IT companies though...
Programmer Creates An AI To (Not Quite) Beat NES Games (2013)
Indeed, and you could do the old trick of making a ram disk for your compiles
> If you intend to treat different inputs differently (e.g., "if it contains the string "AB", I'll use this algorithm, if it has more zeros than ones, I'll use this other one, etc"), this just means that your compression procedure contains some 'if' statements. The laws of information theory don't care whether your compression procedure is actually a computer program or just implicitly encoded into human actions; it's still impossible to reliably represent random data with fewer than the usual number of bits.

While you're obviously correct about the information theory aspect of this, in this particular challenge, the contestant enjoys the privilege of pruning his decompressor to match just the one file. All the other "if" statements can be thrown away. So now a lossy algorithm can be used, that just happens not to be lossy on that one particular file.
That's interpreted/JITed vs AOT compiled, not native vs non-native.