skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this is "cargo management" - a low rate stuff. Bad psychology. Bad management.

First of all, so called introverts usually are deliberately avoiding to be dragged into a meeting with idiots. Instead, they prefer and actively using different forms of communication, which does not demand to exercise any social skills in public, like mailing lists or forums, which saves them from an unpleasant burden and discomfort. Those who are unable to understand such simple premise are qualified for idiots.

Secondly, most of meetings are irrelevant waste of time - ritualized events, designed for "parasitic" management to justify its existence and status. This statement could be easily supported by successful existence of project like LLVM, Linux Kernel, BSD, Webkit, you name it, which gives a remarkable results without any explicit, well-paid management and idiotic artificial "productivity" metrics and rituals of loyalty and status of any hierarchical social groups.

It is OK to have an "emergency" meeting in some special occasion. It is tolerable to deal with incompetent management in cases when it solves real problems and shields techies from distractions, but being forced to meet weak-minded, role-playing idiots, for the sake of their gratification from a meaningless public performance, who will encourage me to share yourself completely - no, thank you.

That's why, perhaps, I am not utilized at any Java sweatshop. But I had enough meetings in my IT career.)
convenience is overrated
Please get rid of the white padding on the sides. Takes up valuable area and squeezes the center content too much. Particularly bad in landscape.
What I find compelling about cryptocurrencies is the inversion of trust. So for example we think of interactions with RBI or PayPal as necessary because we are trying to go from ledgers to rupees or dollars (because nobody accepts IOUs as payment).

But if cryptocurrencies take off the way they are probably destined to, then they may reach a higher level of trust than hard currency in some countries. We'll be trying to find ways to go from rupees or dollars to Bitcoins once Bitcoins are accepted everywhere.

I'm thinking the endgame for all of this is that banks will move more and more towards the investment side because it's so easy to make money on volatility (unless governments decide to crack down on making money simply for having money ..unlikely, although capital gains taxes will almost certainly go up to match normal income tax). The traditional "boring" banking that's used for things like mortgages and money transfers is going to have a tough time. That is, until we consider that dollars are backed by the power of their countries and Bitcoins aren't backed by anything, so people will probably rather hold their savings in banks with FDIC insurance rather than strings of random numbers.

After writing all of this out, I think what's going to happen is that capital gains taxes will give way to tariffs that are charged any time cryptocurrencies are converted to hard currency. So people will be free of hand holding until they go to buy a large asset like a car or home that the government can require hard currency for.

We'll probably need a progressive tax on cryptocurrency exchange or else we'll see wealth inequality magnified even higher than it is today. Another option would be to get rid of income tax and switch to a wealth-based accounting where people report the sum total of gains and losses for the year across all currencies and get taxed for increased wealth (or credited for a decrease).

On that note, the progressive tax could be applied each transaction by a factor proportional to each party's wealth rather than the amount of currency exchanged, so that taxes/credits could be applied continuously rather than on a yearly basis. So no more having to do your taxes, but bankers might switch to a style of accounting more like the IRS.
It already has: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem#Early_problem...
> So far I understood Swift to be the next big thing in terms of hot programming languages with a functional flavor.

Swift is tightly coupled to Apple's platforms (which are of course commercially very viable, and if you develop for them you should be looking at Swift), under a proprietary license and developed under closed governance. It's a legitimate product, but under those circumstances it doesn't really have a shot at being a NBT in programming by itself, beyond contributing its ideas to wider discourse.

It's obvious that no generally relevant library/infrastructure will be written in Swift, for example; if anyone with a great idea choses to implement it in Swift first for whatever reason, it will be a reimplementation in another, more widely useful language that gains widespread popularity.
Markdown seems to be a lightweight, readable, unobtrusive markup language for relatively simple documents.

Considering that, hasn't markdown (or one of its dialects) failed if someone feels motivated to use a dedicated editor for it? The side-by-side preview feels particularly ironic considering markdown's purpose, though I guess it is nice to have as a check that you didn't mess up closing a paren and other syntax-things.
“Most perplexing feedback on Swift: folks who see it (and judge it) as the end of a trek - but don't realize it is the start of a new world.”

Chris Lattner

https://twitter.com/clattner_llvm/status/474082459860992000
The equality and truthiness oddities are the worst. One of my biggest pet peeves about languages is weird equality rules. PHP is one of the worst, there is a huge table of crazy rules that I suppose expert PHP people can remember, but it just seems crazy.

Languages like Ruby and Clojure have it best: nil and false are falsy, everything else is truthy.
My point about Mercury was important because it shows that there is an appreciable level of "give" that a theory has before the scientific community agrees that there is something wrong with it. That level of give is socially determined. It does matter if the discoverer of the anomaly is a Cambridge phd or a crackpot with no credentials. The measurement instruments matter, and the fallability of those instruments play into the acceptance of the results, too. A Popperian viewpoint is somewhat naive because what constitutes a falsification is incredibly fraught! Read Lakatos. He models scientific progression as a series of research programs that have "hard cores" of belief that are protected by ancillary theories. In the event of a negative result, it's those theories that are investigated first. For example, is my telescope correct? Is the theory of light that informs my telescope correct? Is there a dark planet influencing things that I can't see? In hindsight, Mercury should have falsified Newton, because all of the falsifying observations were valid. But it didn't because reasons.

We (and by we I mean Popperians) want to believe that science is a series of universally positive logical assertions that can be cut down by a single negative observation, as logic would dictate. But we don't always know what the criteria are for successful negative observations. The criteria are less rigid and well defined than we would be willing to admit. They vary from community to community. Robert Milikan won the Nobel prize for measuring the charge of an electron with his brilliant oil drop experiment. Only problem? His measurement was wrong. As folks tried to repeat it, they deviated more and more from his original measurement, until many repetitions and many publications later they landed on the correct value. If you were to plot the "true" measurement for the charge of the electron against time, you would see something deviating very slowly from an arbitrary incorrect value to the correct one. You have to ask, how on earth is this possible? Bias, authority, imprecision over truth criteria—all at play. And I think it's this sociological fuzziness in play in many thousands of small ways that lead us to at least question the assumptions on which truth is founded.
> those who do exploit those people though

I don't think that a majority of these people are exploited. Some are, and it definitely happens more often than to people like you and me (going from the assumptions that hacker news is a website for software developers, I have trouble picturing a developer who falls into "really poor people" category), but still — not always. More often it's just market reality that create these kind of conditions.
That is a terrible quote, provided by an author trying to defend a fairly awful language. It is rhetorically weaselly, attempting to cast aspersions at critics, without actually providing meaningful defenses.
Hackathon Hackers is an eclectic group of over 13,000 individuals -- I started it 8 months ago to create an inclusive, welcoming community for up-and-coming hackers.

People come from tons of different backgrounds and this community provides a space where radical ideas are welcome.

You'll definitely find some people with interesting, sometimes scary, views but that by no means defines the entire group of people. "Hackathon Hackers" has over 100 active subgroups that explore a wide range of topics and perspectives.

That said, by creating this space, the issues we face in tech, and in the world at large, are more visible in HH than any other community I've ever been a part of.

Improving the culture will be a never-ending pursuit and will take tens of thousands of young hackers banding together to do so. The issues you pointed out are very real.

It won't happen in a day, but we've come so far in just a few short months and this is still just the start.
That is helpful. Thanks ! :)
>Lacking any deeper faith and incapable of living with doubt, it is only natural that believers in reason should turn to the sorcery of numbers. How else can they find meaning in their lives?

- strikes me as a bit of a straw man argument. As a believer in reason myself I see it as rather uncorrelated with living with doubt. People up on reason can often handle probabilities and uncertainties - it's more the religious who have a problem with doubt.

Looking at Pinker's numerous statistics it seems highly probable the world has been getting more peaceful. Gray's arguments implying doing the stats is dubious when you can nit pick some of the details seem rather weak.
Touch works on my phone. Which mobile device are you using?
this is really shocking.
Now you're just moving the goalposts. My response is directed towards the original claim made in Graeber's essay, not your liberal interpretations thereof.
I guess the simplest thing would just be to first introduce them to some simple rules, like "this is how you indicate a header", "this is how you indicate emphasis (like italics)".

After all, isn't conventions like that for plain text writing how markdown emerged in the first place?
The title of this article implies that no funds beat the market over time, and that isn't true. The study it is based on (which was done by S&P, a company that profits when people invest based upon their index) doesn't look at overall returns. It looks at whether any funds were in the top 25% for the last 5 consecutive years.

The answer is no, but who cares? Profitable investing is far more about how right you are (when you are right) than how often you are right.
If you don't have a library of algorithms and methods memorized, you won't be as productive in solving real-world problems as the one who does. Often the difference can be dramatic.

Many good algorithms are quite counter-intuitive and non-obvious, so there is very little chance that you would come up with one yourself during the course of working on a problem. In practice, people who haven't spent enough time memorizing algorithms tend to choose the wrong path while solving real-world problems, as they can't even anticipate the direction in which the correct solution lies because, again, many good algorithms are non-obvious and can't be thought out on the spot.
This. We portray the USA as a good peaceful nation while it was at war 218 out of 239 years of its history since 1776. On the other hand we portray Iran as an evil danger to mankind while they did not attack any country since 1795 but were invaded several times. Okay, there is IS having people with backward religious believes, attacking innocent countries, torturing and executing people, terrorizing their own people, producing propaganda and deliberately lying to get support for or justify unjust actions...uppps, sorry, that was the USA, too, sometimes I confuse them.
As someone that uses Twitch a lot I think this is awesome... Its a lot easier than resizing my windows all of the time.
Agreed - was just about to post this. The whole point of the iPad, IMHO, is to give a "portable desktop" browser experience. I can't stand when sites do the awkward in-between tablet version. Looks worse and less usable. I'm ok with the idea of responsive design, but let's stick with desktop and phone as the two versions.
A training set like Google's Recaptcha data would be useful. Maybe Project Gutenberg, Wikipedia and other open source projects should start an open Recaptcha-like service to collect such data based on scanned documents/books/etc.
Scrum seems to be mostly about having better alibis
I set up drupal and use its book module for all the notes-taking needs, its layout can be adjusted on the fly, and I can safely backup all my content, plus its search function is nice and handy too.
"can be copy+pasted"

http://imgur.com/8SNbm0k
I thought that was curious, so I put one of their code samples to the test:

Swift WTF: http://swiftwtf.tumblr.com/image/88465530183)

But it looks fine on my machine (Xcode 6.2): http://imgur.com/rJU7lcx
How to clean up disk space on Linux using BleachBit
Will someone please develop one with spell check? Dillinger.io fails this too. I use ia writer but its not ideal for other features.
Ask HN: My idea is already taken. What should I do?
A few months ago a friend of mine and I had an idea for a smartphone oriented social networkish project. We did some research, but it looked like it's unique (it isn't, we just didn't know the right keywords for searching). We started documenting the idea, writing down everything we thought about so that we don't miss any piece of the idea during development, but we didn't wrote any code.

Today I did some more digging, and found out that the idea is far from unique. I found some projects/apps that are mostly the same as our would be, but almost all of them are dead, it seems like no one is using them.

Now, I'm wondering what should we do. Why are these apps dead? Is it the realization or the idea? If the first, there might be chances that we can create something good that people will love, but if it's the idea, then maybe there is no market for that and we should abandon it too.
you classify a problem you don't even fully understand as easily solved because you're willing to spend other people's money freely. you have upper management written all over you.
Swift's rules are pretty simple too: true is true, false is false, and nothing else is any sort of boolean. If you want to check whether an array is empty, do so explicitly. If you want to test an integer for zero, you have to do == 0. Even testing for nil requires an explicit != nil.

As for equality, I think it's just old bugs from an old prerelease compiler. These posts are ancient history, relatively speaking. I just tested on the latest public release and a == [1], [1] == a, and [1] == [1] all produced true, as one would expect. str === str won't compile, also as one would expect (String is a value type, and as such comparing object identity is nonsensical).
Angular-translate: internationalization for your Angular apps
Doesn't the culture of free web services actually create some of the perverse incentives at play in Google, Facebook and others today? The paying customers become advertisers and data miners and users are relegated to giving up their information (and potentially: future freedom). If people paid for these services, internet companies would see them as customers to serve rather than personal data to sell and exploit.
Yeah, this is silly to talk about now. I'm sure you can dig up plenty of WTF things about the latest Swift, but few if any of these examples are still valid.
PHP is pretty bad, but I think JS really takes the crown for insane equality comparisons. Basically every weird equality comparison from PHP is in JS, along with some other humdingers like 0 == [].

And my favorite, '\n\r\t' == 0
I have repeatedly asked for a list of the inaccuracies, since I substantially wrote, researched and cited the article http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk . Yudkowsky called me a LYING LIAR WHO LIES LIES LIES but the only claim of an actual lie he could come up with was where it said this was an incentive to donate to MIRI. Given that the original Basilisk post and the preceding post were literally about how to come up with lots of money to donate to MIRI (then SIAI), I'm not really willing to accept that as a lie.

For the claim of inaccuracies: that article is cited to the phrase level for good reason. If you're claiming inaccuracies, you're going to need actual details of why the cites are wrong.
Any feedback would be appreciated :)
Since the merchants and banks are responsible for fraud on credit cards, they seem to be a bit more on to of things.

But are they?

"Total global payment-card fraud losses were $11.3 billion in 2012, up nearly 15% from the prior year. The United States—the only country in which counterfeit-card fraud is consistently growing—accounted for 47% of that amount, according to the Nilson Report: card issuers lost $3.4 billion and merchants another $1.9 billion."

This kind of inefficiency doesn't come cheap. There's a reason why VISA and Mastercard disallowed merchants to charge more for CC transactions.

EU and others seem to be rushing to implement strong auth, but as a consumer, screw that. Use machine learning and law enforcement to deal with it and let my experiences be unencumbered. Spending 2 minutes to authorize merchants seems like a large annoyance.

How is having your card blocked and having to wait days to receive it not being encumbered?

As for the debit card thing, that wasn't what I was talking about. I was talking about remote payments, where we use direct debit, not debit cards.
Where do the Rothschilds keep their money not in Index funds but in actively managed IT's RIT Capital Partners has done very nicely.

And Mr Buffet's investment company has beaten wall street for decades.

You are believing all that advertising the index fund managers are putting out and your bank is aggressively selling you.
ReText has spell checker: Edit -> Spell check -> Enable
Jailbreak iOS 8.2 and jailbreak iOS 8.2.1 Untethered
One of the difficult things with handling data is that you have to pick the data, then determine its meaning. If you pick the wrong data or have a pre-built meaning you are hanging the data on, your research is void.

That is why double-blind studies exist, and one of the key parts in data-based social studies programs contains whole classes on building experiments: data is easily abusable. While Pinker might have charts, without understanding the causality of those charts - in depth! - all it becomes is propaganda for Pinker's ideas and a quick way to sway nerds.

(not to say that Pinker is right or wrong, but having data doesn't add credibility ipso facto).
Losing "The Game" As A Service.
What does NBT stand for?
Ask HN: ABC Testing?
I know A/B testing is super hot, who does ABC tests? Best practices? Does C stand for constant?
Great reply, although I was hoping to make a discussion out of this.

Negative sentences doesn't contain as much information as positive ones.

"I don't like what you like" carries less information than "I like [something different]".

In other words. If you tell me what your opinion is I might change mine too.
Err wait, this might be just me as I disabled cross-site referer header in about:config.
nothing new here.

the OP doesn't even mention anything about taxes, which shifts things even more in favor of index investing.
Some do you just have to know what your doing and be prepared to invest against the market BKY LWY and TRY in the UK have done very very well for me over that last decade.

many of my long term active investments have beaten the market over 10 years by over 100% you just need to look at the ones with 50-100 years track records

Look at the average IT vs Unit trust vs bench mark
This is a blog whose latest entries deal with Xcode 6.0 beta 3 (out of at least 7 eventual betas, many of which made substantial changes to the language). Right now, the 'standard' Swift version is Xcode 6.1's (Swift 1.1), and Swift 1.2 is in its third beta. So it's definitely not representative of the current state of the language (which was, admittedly, in pretty awful shape at that point in time).
"Next Big Thing", taken from the OP.
> Okay, there is IS having people with backward religious believes, attacking innocent countries, torturing and executing people, terrorizing their own people, producing propaganda and deliberately lying to get support for or justify unjust actions...uppps, sorry, that was the USA, too, sometimes I confuse them.

Arguments could be made for this in the case of the US, but it's pretty cut and dry as to IS.
CommonMark should be mentioned on the ScholarlyMarkdown frontpage. I thought it was some competing project.
>You may argue most or even all of this framework is lifted from earlier philosophical and scientific achievements, but in some areas standing on the shoulders of giants is actually a good sign you're in the right place.

The good bits are not original and the original bits are not good.

The problem is that LessWrong has a habit of neologism - so EY will use his own term for something ("fallacy of gray" is one example - known for 2000 years as the "continuum fallacy"), then his young readers, who have met whatever it is for the first time ever, will think his work is much more original and significant than it is 'cos they can't find his term for it. This cuts them off from 2000 years of thinking on the topic and increases LW's halo effect.
If someone is chanting about how war is a relic of the past, how humanity has ascended past all that, then one should look to their powder: that is the exact attitude displayed in the 1900-1913 era, just prior to the most horrific cataclysm of violence yet to date. And it was also popular in the 20s and 30s, as a sop to the wounds of the Great War.
Each base 10 digit occurs at least once in your number. It's not obvious to me that each base b digit occurs at least once for all bases b in your number.
The Rigidity of Investment Slide Decks
Misleading statistic: "We selected the 25 percent of funds with the best returns over those 12 months — and then asked how many of those funds actually remained in the top quarter in each of the four succeeding 12-month periods through March 2014."

The statistic that matters, as Warren Buffett and others have repeated again and again, is COMPOUND RETURN!!!

Consider these two investment options. Option 1 outperforms 60% of the time (three out of five years), but Option 2 produces a greater compound gain:

YEAR Option 1 Option 2
Year 1 8.0% 15.0%
Year 2 8.0% 7.0%
Year 3 8.0% 4.0%
Year 4 8.0% 19.0%
Year 5 8.0% 6.0%

Total gain 46.9% 61.4%
Compound/yr 8.0% 10.1%

The study I'd love to see is one that finds out (1) whether there are actively managed funds that consistently produce better compound returns than the indices over five to 10 year periods, and (2) whether there are any unusual concentrations of long-term compound outperformance that cannot be explained by chance among those funds.

For example, what if it turns out that only a small number of actively managed funds are consistent long-term outperformers but many of them claim to use the same investment methodology? That would be a very unusual concentration of long-term success. I'd love to see a study with that kind of analysis.
Congress may impose license plate reader limits