skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The author of this article is just cocky. He thinks he has the world figured out so well he even referred to economists as "dense."

Seriously, economists have actually worked out the reason behind the wealth gap, he didn't even address or critique the prevailing theory. Most likely because he doesn't even know what it is.
This would require a constitutional amendment. We have free movement in America. It's not the Soviet Union.
"I cannot think of any companies that create GPL-licensed software and actually make their money selling that GPL-licensed software."

RedHat, Suse, I just got done telling you Samsung, Zentyal, just off the top of my head, tons more if you just did a quick search. Note that sometimes it's bundled with hardware, or it's the support that makes them *the most8 money, but quite often they still make money selling the software too, so lets put this myth about practicality to rest.
I gave a talk on Volt yesterday using 0.9, and it went great. I'm really excited to see where the framework goes. It may not be a solution to all the problems a lot of us face with webdev, but I think it really takes me back to my first days with Rails and just having fun making something, even if its not a production piece. I've also seen it used for internal tools and had a good amount of success. :) Hoping it keeps taking off.
I think you may be conflating creation with publishing/marketing. It's possible that many things have been created that do not appear in history books because they were not preserved or advertised by wealth. We live in a world now where self publishing/endorsement is extremely accessible so it's possible that many modern day creations might make their way to the future without explicit dependence on wealth. One thing is certain, our current state of affairs is radically unlike that of both the 16th and the 20th centuries. Solutions to these problems will likely be novel.
Both >_<
Show HN: I made a super easy way to verify users' mobile numbers using SMS
>Rich people as individuals tend to stay rich

Can you provide a dataset with some cutoff for "rich," and demonstrate people in that class stay there? The entire point is I've tried to do this, and for each dataset that allows measuring such a claim I get the opposite conclusion. The majority fall out of that class, even within their own lifetime.

If a person has 1B, and later has 100M, they have lost value. If your original definition of rich is 1B, then they fell out. So if you now move your definition of rich to include 100M, then you also need to consider all people that had 100M, not just the guy with 1B. Now you'll find most don't stay at 100M, most fall. Say you then move your definition to 10M. Then 1M. Then 100K. Repeat the process, but you're moving the definition of rich which is not accurate reasoning.

I've done all this, and your claim is unsupportable from any dataset I've examined. For each dataset where I could see how many people started at some level of wealth or income, within their lifetime (and often much shorter), the majority fell below that wealth or income level.

Can you provide a dataset showing otherwise? I posted how to get a few counter to your claim already.
DEA Agent Says He Was Instructed to Not Enforce Drug Laws in Wealthy Communities
Unless you live in a society where hunting for food is essential to ensure your own survival, I believe a lot of people are prepared to disagree with you.
I absolutely think the EFF is making poor use of their funds defending someone who was doing penetration testing on live planes with people aboard.

If the security is as bad as he claims, the risk his testing might inadvertently put people in danger could be pretty high. And he was a repeat offender, as by his own admission he'd hacked planes 15-20 times so far in a live environment. That's incredibly dangerous, and it takes an incredible amount of ego and an incredible lack of consideration to fail to realize that he could be putting people at risk himself.
but we cant download it unless we buy the physical copy !!
It has been proven in multiple studies that police dogs can be manipulated by their handlers, either by triggering them consciously or just by the fact that the dog picks up on the cop's body language.

http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/welcome/features/2010-2011/02/2...
It depends on whether you consider intensity or duration to determine how "easy" a workout is. Sure, 2.5 hours is a lot of time to invest, but walking at 2.5 MpH hardly seems strenuous enough to qualify as exercise.

A 160 pound person could burn 500 calories in ~40 minutes jogging at a 10 minute per mile pace, and could easily offset a Big Mac in a single day's exercise (not saying that the person should use this to justify eating a Big Mac).
Yes, you are right.

However, it's possible using MPFR in a way without suffering this issues. One could increase precision every time there would be rounding.
It's pretty demoralizing to me that there are 3 SCOTUS justices who think it's Constitutional to detain people without probable cause as long as it's not for very long.

As I think Justice Roberts once quipped, if you "briefly" hold someone without cause, you've "briefly" violated their Constitutional rights.
I suspect you'd need to call their bluff and then try to get whatever the K9 find thrown out (assuming they had to delay you to let them arrive)
If I did not get married I would have stayed in the military. Being a civilian doing the same exact job I'm making twice as much now.
I'm assuming a conditional visa that transitions to permanent residency (green card) if one lives in Detroit for five years is legal, though. Many visas are restricted to employers, for example, and Canada has a similar system through the provincial nominee program.
Yes, it does happen on some text inputs, it tends to depend on relative size (for example, I recall zoom in landscape but not necessarily in portrait, etc.).

Generally I welcome it, because I can click on the teeeny input field and have it come "closer" to me for editing then get out of the way.
> If people can't stand websites that aren't tailored to mobile devices, they will simply leave and find another

Yes, and the fifth time in a row I have to do that I stop thinking "these are shitty websites" and start thinking "this is a shitty search engine".

Search engines are inherently not neutral. Why should a spammy site, filled with ads and ripped-off content from different sites, not score higher if it has higher PageRank? Because, again, that's not what you as a user wants. That's far more important for what a "good search engine" is than some idea of neutrality based entirely on how many other sites link to a page.

Note that there absolutely be a balance here, but that seems to be exactly what is going on. This is just one more weight on the ranking, same as their earlier adjustment for site load speed.
> This would require a constitutional amendment.

No, it probably wouldn't.

> We have free movement in America.

On a constitutional level, that's not necessarily true of immigrants. The states generally can't impose such limits on immigrants because regulating immigration is Constitutionally a reserved federal power, so it would be a Supremacy Clause issue. The feds, however, almost certainly can impose place-of-residency restrictions on immigrants without a Constitutional amendment.
I try to find end users in my target market and somehow get them to use it during the process. It's a tough sell, but you can always find someone who is fed up enough to try anything new.

On the project I am currently working on, we are building software for real estate agents. I actually brought in the owner of a small firm (10 agents) as a co-founder in exchange for him forcing his team to use the application. This ended up working very well, we got instant feedback and were able to update the software generally same day. I hold regular meetings with the team, two or three times weekly, to make sure they have no roadblocks in doing their job. They are happy because we are molding the software as we go to specific needs, and we are happy because we are able to find out instantly what works and what doesnt.

We also brought in another team once we felt it was at least close to beta status. We offered them free usage of the application through public release, and then six months free after release.
Arguably, Jay-Z's point was that when he had 99 problems, the K-9 was not one! There's a good discussion of this in Mason's wonderful dissection of 99 Problems [1]. It's on PDF page 16, or section M. (I was actually kind of surprised at this ruling, because I thought this was pretty well settled law.)

[1] http://www.slu.edu/Documents/law/Law%20Journal/Archives/LJ56...
Thanks for your explanation. AGPL3 sounds nice. I hope my next question doesn't make this more confusing, but in my roadmap for the next months I have a paid subscription plan. Is this still doable with this license?

I guess I'm just overthinking about this problem instead of focusing in the real deal. I have the product in place, I'm preparing a paid plan for the future and after that, release the source code. Shouldn't be that hard to decide. Damn.
Meh, library sharing is not the problem. LD can easily figure out what version of a lib the binary wants.

You don't need to go whole hog container to "fix" the issue. Look at distros like NixOS, Guix, or Gobolinux.
Inside Apple’s ResearchKit
The supreme court often times feels like the only institution protecting the rights of the citizens. If they ever flip, it's pretty much game over.
The issue is that he was hacking the plane. Intent is irrelevant. The reality is he could inadvertently damage an aircraft system while playing around. A responsible security researcher would not put 200 people at risk to do his testing.
Courgette is a very CPU-intensive transformation. It pays a large time/space tradeoff to minimize bandwidth required.

Server-side code deploys are usually not so bandwidth limited.

Facebook used a BitTorrent-based approach for a while: http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/exclusive-a-behind-t...
It is a "chance" to purchase an Apple Watch. You might say a lottery. If you get selected you can purchase one.
Admittedly, given the technology those secret spy agencies have, the people making policy decisions in each country are in kind of a weird place: every country but their own has a thorough picture of what their citizens are doing, and can use that information strategically against them.

It seems like the only two real Nash equilibria here are the unilateral ban of foreign surveillance, or the unilateral grant of domestic surveillance. Otherwise we're in an "only the criminals have guns" situation that's the worst of both.
Simply commenting to confirm the translation is (perhaps surprisingly) accurate.
Simply commenting to confirm the translation is (to me, surprisingly) accurate.
> Halfway through and still not a single useful insight. It's just the same cloying nostalgia that caused "bibliophiles" to panic when the Kindle first hit the streets, and apparently still causes them immense anxiety today.

This was my reaction as well. "The Myth of the Paperless Office" (https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/myth-paperless-office) is a much better treatise on the utility and relevance of treeware.
I hadn't seen that, but I've been saying for years that if you went Detroit to come back, draw a border around it and make it a free trade, low tax special economic zone that was free from state and federal regulations and only having the US constitution applied.
Within a decade people would be lining up at the borders wanting to get in. And it would be a brilliant experiment on how the current crony capitalism heavily regulated economy is the problem, and the solution can only be large scale reversal of all that.
>Alito and Thomas' dissents cite some fairly compelling evidence that the officer did have reasonable suspicion: the vehicle occupants looked nervous, the officer smelled the overwhelming scent of air freshener (often used to mask drugs), and their story didn't make much sense.

when i was stopped by police (2 times during 15 years in US - for non-attached sticker and for allegedly "not obeying traffic control device") i was so nervous that my speech was pretty slurred and hands were shaking even like 10 minutes after the encounter, my story at least in the second case hardly made any sense - was driving home after hiking for several hours in the hills during July heatwave weekend and wasn't sure what sign the police was talking about... I guess i was saved by not-using air-freshener in my car - i guess nobody uses the smell of extremely sweaty dusty 40 year old male for masking the drugs. Thanks, God!
Nothing I said contradicts your description of natural selection, that "fitness for making to the point where you have reproduced." But you are missing my point that the rate of evolution produced by natural selection is dependent on the turnover of the population. The parents need to die to make room for more fit offspring once the carrying capacity of the eco-system has been reached.

If you still disagree, can you follow the link and point out flaws in the logic there?
What's the likelihood of supporting disposable 6-digit codes a la Google Authenticator or Authy? It would be kind of neat to be able to implement this sort of thing without having to request any contact info at all (sites that require phone numbers are annoying, and there's only one email-based option AFAICT); just provide a QR code and tell the user to scan it with their 2FA app of choice, or (optionally) fall back to requesting a destination for verification codes (i.e. for those who don't have smartphones but do have email addresses or SMS-capable dumphones).
Don't know how I didn't notice that, thank you!
I really recommend that (thoughtful) people interested in this subject read ‘Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies’ by Nick Bostrom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence:_Paths,_Dange...
I believe they're handling the tech for a lot of other video streaming services (like HBO Now).

It's a private company, but they are owned by the teams, and they are perfectly fine making extra money from it I imagine :]
I'm worried that it will.
At least when I use the desktop site I am confident that all of the site's functionality is available, and that the interface is probably not just broken and unusable due to bugs, which is surprisingly common on mobile websites. I guess people don't test mobile websites as much, and the increased dynamicity of mobile layouts and diversity of behavior among mobile browsers increases the probability of bugs...
from the majority:

"As Struble later testified, at that
point, Rodriguez and Pollman “had all their documents
back and a copy of the written warning. I got all the
reason[s] for the stop out of the way[,] . . . took care of all the business".

Struble asked
for permission to walk his dog around Rodriguez’s vehicle.
Rodriguez said no. Struble then instructed Rodriguez to
turn off the ignition, exit the vehicle, and stand in front of
the patrol car to wait for the second officer.

If the officer had reasonable suspicion to do a dog sniff, then he would not have needed to ask for permission. And the courts have generally concluded that refusing a voluntary search isn't evidence that a crime has been committed.

So the conclusion that the dog search was based on a reasonable suspicion is not backed up by the officer's testimony, or by the officers actions.
Does converting chemical bond energy into kinetic energy somehow remove energy (i.e. mass) from the system?

Does a block at rest sitting on the top of a hill have more mass than a spinning block at the bottom of a hill (assuming the rotational kinetic energy equals the difference in potential energy)?
Not sure why you got downvoted with no reasoning, but you're right. I would bet my left testes that major money corps of the Three Sister Cities do the exact same thing but just make it less obvious and do it over longer periods of time. The whole things is rigged anyway, and the SEC is a joke.

Also, there are plenty of middle-men scapegoats to be sacrificed if the big boys get caught too. (see, gold manipulation scandal, libor, etc).
Damn it, now i really want to see a FFOS powered flip phone on sale in the Nordics.
That would work also, but the thing is, even if they never summoned the K9, they are threatening to, and the law distinguishes between the police making legal vs. illegal threats.

That is, if the threaten to run your license plate, that's fine because it's legal (even if it would find something bad). But if they threaten to ram your car or take your kids, then any consent you gave would be (IIRC) inadmissible as being under duress.

This ruling would suggest that the K9 threat falls under the latter.
Understanding Cloud Pricing Part 2 – Local SSD
So, I'm back. I recommended it to a few colleagues, they're gonna try it as well. Let me take back a few things I said: I'd pay for this, but not that much. But, agencies and PR firms (obvious) could actually get a lot of value out of something like this.

Best of luck
You're clearly an agent provocateur.

Hey, it's a plausible theory...
The U.S. Air Force Turns to a Foreign Weather Forecasting System
I appreciate that you posted this. My first thought when seeing this was "Why all the fancywork when we can just use S3?"

Keywhiz uses KMS to encrypt config data and then put it in DynamoDB. This means that access to Keywhiz-managed keys is ultimately mediated by access rules around who has access to the KMS key used to encrypt the secret.

With an S3-based solution, either Amazon can manage the keys for you and you use IAM Roles to mediate access (which I find to be a cleaner solution, personally, though open to other perspectives), or you can use KMS keys in S3 and then we're back to access being mediated by KMS keys, plus IAM roles, but without a DynamoDB table to manage or pay for (i.e. S3 will be super cheap b/c secrets occupy so little space).

I still appreciated the OP's intro to KMS, which I found insightful.
I don't mind the discussion of language semantics. I used the blanket term "intellectual property law" as a short hand, because I didn't want to address the several different ideas and laws that it covers individually, due to time constraints basically.

However, its absolutely correct that it is really a crude blanket term that lacks precision and deals with several different things that are thematically linked, but quite separate in reality. its not bad for someone to expand on a point I've made with those additional details. it adds to the discussion, I think.
I understand the reason the article is framed this way: "Suprise! Business interests are on the same side as privacy advocates on this issue!" But if the argument "this is bad for business" doesn't fly when someone wants to pollute, why is it a persuasive argument when the shoe is on the other foot and progressive interests are aligned with business interests?

The real reason this person doesn't support the C-51 is because it's nasty big brother crap. Don't minimize the real reason by saying "There's a grown-up reason I'm against the bill: it's bad for business". Privacy is valuable by itself, whether or not it's good or bad for business.
Russia and China partner on $200m venture fund, incubator for tech startups
Computers used to be so rare they got their own retirement parties
I'll seriously take you up on that offer, if you truly meant it.
The Framework of Music Theory as Represented with Groups [pdf]
"The Applesoft Basic Programmer's Reference Manual"

I was around 10 and my parents bought a used Apple II and this book came with it. I thought it was the coolest thing to make a program, even if it was super basic. I wish I would have kept the book, my parents ended up throwing out the book and the computer a few years later.
Absolutely, but I think this ruling narrows the distance between these different areas of the law.

I agree that currently it is fair game for an unsuspected crime to be prosecutable in the course of a legitimate search for another (and gave an example of why that could be a good thing), but I still think the original case represents a glaring failure of law. The defendant in this case allowed the officer to enter in good faith, so that the officer could reassure himself that no crime of violence had taken place and that the defendant's explanation of loud sexual activity was indeed truthful. Notwithstanding the contraband nature of marijuana, this good faith invitation should IMHO have been a massive mitigatory factor. The qualitative difference between the suspected and the actual crime are so great as to shock my conscience - not only are murder or rape considered more severe as evidenced by the heavier sentences they would attract, but they're also crimes of violence, and crimes involving a victim, whereas the harm that results from marijuana cultivation is proximate (at best) and to the extent that it even exists, is diffuse because the impact is societal. The fact that McGacken was sent to prison for 10 years Makes me want to throw up every time I think about it, especially because he was so cooperative with the investigation.

(http://www.leagle.com/decision/in%20njco%2020100315165 for people who would like to read the details; I should have linked this in the message above).

I'm speaking here of moral rather than legal principle, ie I'm making a purely normative argument. On a technical level I agree with you completely, and I have yet to bridge the gap between moral and legal principle to my own satisfaction.
I'm not sure where you're seeing that. I see an option to buy the e-book only for $23.95 and the page has red text that reads "Full PDF, ePub, and mobi ebooks now available!". Am I missing something you see on the page?
I have to say, this definitely made me chuckle
Building a Search Engine for Data
"Officer safety" is one of those things that can balloon out though.

What if the officer doesn't feel safe until everyone is handcuffed in a corner and all the dogs are dead? (I'm exaggerating about the people, but sadly, not about the dogs).
Realistically a police officer in the US does not have to worry about such "illegal threats". Manipulating people into letting them fish for evidence is a pretty standard part of the job. Most likely a judge isn't going to throw out a search except when there is an egregious error on LE's part.

E.g. if the suspect clearly stated "I do not consent to any searches. Am I being detained? If I am not being detained then I want to leave" and an officer proceeded to search anyway or detained the person, it would probably get thrown out, assuming there was video/audio evidence. If not, it's the cop's word against the defendant's (I'll let you guess whose the judge will believe).

But if the cop lies and says you have to wait for a K9 unit, and you believe him without asking if you're being detained, anything that dog finds is likely going to be fair game just as if you were bullied into consenting to a search (a friend of mine once refused consent to a vehicle search and was then told by the officer that such a refusal constituted probable cause, so he relented out of fear).

Keep in mind that this is all without probable cause. If they have probable cause, they can detain you and make you wait for a dog. With the Rodriguez case specifically, there was "erratic driving" which is likely enough cause for most judges.