skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not the OP, and cool story; however, what they're paid doesn't matter, it's a red herring. It's their JOB to deal with people and and it's not my job as a shopper to validate the emotions of the counter worker or my co-workers. Ring up my stuff, take my money, and let me leave.

You're chastising him for his "attitude"; what attitude? He's correct and he didn't display any attitude other than simple honesty.
How to Save the World by Taking Back Control of Our Data (2003)
Heh. The funny thing is that in a way everything on that page makes a lot of sense. If you take mainstream feminist and egalitarian ideology at its face value, and then you look at how things actually play out in the real world, then something like his masculism makes sense. However, most people when noticing a difference between the ideology and the reality will question the ideology. Other people won't think about it too hard and will accept some rationalization for the contradictions. It takes a special soul to make a reductio ad absurdum and actually completely believe the reduction.
PBS's Robert X. Cringely from 2003.

In particular:

"Today's news is that a cypherpunk nightmare is upon us. Information is not power after all: Old-fashioned power is power. If you aren't big industry or government, you have very little power. Once they've hacked the electronic voting system, you'll have no power at all."
you're right, i'm no longer mooching off of my neighbors now(maybe because the connection was so bad) but i feel like it's not unethical because comcast made it available, so why not use it?
I've read your ethical engineer essay. Your ethics seem to be from the 1960's. In the Startup Community they are completely different and part of hacker culture founded in the 1990's and quickly changes based on the youth and founders.

I myself had to learn to adapt to these new age ethics by Paul Graham and others. Most of the industry goes by these modern ethics from Dotcom giants to the small startups.

They can tell you aren't a good fit just by the interview when you reveal your 1960's code of ethics.
For anyone else interested in scaling up pixel art, there are alternative methods to just using nearest neighbour, such as EPX or something. I found this article on Datagenics to be pretty solid:

http://www.datagenetics.com/blog/december32013/index.html
> the way he talks he sounds like one of those Mensa types

He is discriminating people based on IQ and I don't think Mensa members are like that at all. Mensa's founder wanted to gather brilliant minds to solve society difficult problems (I think they are missing that mission though) which I think is a laudable.

I felt uneasy reading this article... He is specially discriminative in the last section and I don't think all the Noble prizes in the world give the rights to anyone to talk like that.
Wow, didn't know that :( Thanks for the link.
They need to unify taxes on residential units in a revenue neutral way. A unified rate should be selected that reduces taxes on ordinary units by the same amount as the extra billion from the superrich. This should make a change more politically palatable.

The biggest beneficiaries of the current system are the property developers. Fairer property taxes on these high end units may mean lower sales prices, and that seems just fine.

One error in the article is the idea that landlords pass through taxes as higher rents. That completely misunderstands landlord psychology. Landlords will charge as high a tent as they can. Tax rates affect the value of the property when sold by reducing the cap rate, they don't affect rents.

Fairness shouldn't impact the requirements for low income units. Those should be traded for the right to build, not for a tax break.

The article suggests the complexity in the laws are based on the difficulties in 1980 of calculating year to year increases in property values. Much more data is available now and lots of work has gone into such algorithms, that should be less of a barrier now. It's probably less important that the algorithm be perfect than that the methodology should be apply equally to everyone.
Y6 is barely controllable if one of the rotor fails but still able to land without much hassle. Hexa in normal configuration handles motor failure better. If you want real redundancy go for X8 or normal octo - 16 rotor copters would be even better but these are pretty rare.
That is a straw man. You define speaking out and having an impact as mutually exclusive. Speaking out with integrity and principle always has impact. But the world is overfull with loud UN-principled people taking stands. Few walk the talk. Cognitive dissonance and self-serving excuses win. We lack the courage or the will to sacrifice for the good of others. So things stay the same, or get worse. Until it gets so bad that even the reluctant finally act, usually out of selfishness.

Take a stand on something you see as wrong, and walk the talk. Today, not tomorrow. No excuses.
But... Obama!
Isn't O'Riley trying to rile up his target audience by getting his guest worked up though? If he makes the guest look unruly, even by becoming unruly himself, he can blame the guest and make the guest look bad. It's the attraction to the show.

I don't watch O'Riley, but that's my perception from reading about things he's done/said.
Thanks. You're right. Now I'm just wondering what IdenTrust gains from free DV certificates.
Which is why the Enterprise editions are not eligible for free upgrades to Windows 10. They want businesses to do their licensing directly with Microsoft.
Yup, this post is about the start of a journey that is still ongoing for me. It still takes work and I still lose focus and do poorly and tried to call that out at the end.

To your specific point, I probably was even worse in 2008 than what you experienced in 2010. That's probably true at every point since. I'm getting better, but I am sure you can find people even in the last year who would say this post doesn't reflect the Boz they met. I believe those people are getting fewer and their experiences less bad, but I am definitely not great at this yet so the post should be taken as a belief I hold and a behavior I aspire to.
Good design = it gets shit done. I don't care for PHP syntax, but it gets shit done. Any definition of good design beyond that simple metric is pure masturbation.

Docker is written in Go and $95m is more validation than you'll get in ten lifetimes.
Makes me wonder what would have happened if this acquisition was done a decade ago.
Sorry, but you're just saying the same thing: that the basic economic principle of price being determined by what the market will bear doesn't apply to housing.

Either people will pay more, in which case landlords will raise their rents until people stop being willing to pay more, or people won't pay more, no matter what the cost to the landlord.

Nowhere in this does the landlord show up with a tax document and say "see folks, now you gotta pay MOAR TAX".
Why don't these things carry automatic emergency parachutes?
Imagine what they could achieve if they were kinder to people.
The constitution was meant to be a living document. That is why it is amenable.

Also the idea that the framers could have seen anything like digital data collection is preposterous. Just because they had records doesn't mean they had any sort of access to the monitoring of your documents like we do today. The scale just want there.

There is an episode on true detective where one of the detectives goes through old case files. He has stacks of then and has to search them onelaw at a time. Compare that to a key word search or a elastic search.

Could the third party law apply to Dropbox or Google drive. Those are my documents, but stored by a third party. I sure hope warrants are needed for officers to go through my files on Google servers.

We need to look at the constitution with new eyes and re work it for a digital age.

Sorry for any Grammer issues I'm on my phone.
I strongly believe cooperation yields better long term outcomes for everyone, and because of that I pick low cost pro-social strategies over low cost anti-social strategies. I don't frame this as "trying to maximize use out of people". I think about it as sparing people from having unnecessary unpleasant interactions.

I see telling people they're wrong as selfish. It's almost never necessary, and in a probabilistic sense is not the most efficient way to make them correct, because instead of just changing their mind, they have to tamp down their ego, avoid getting ticked at you, and then change their mind. Bam: you've just made their lives harder, for the satisfaction of being explicit that you're more correct than they are.
Implement it as a merkle tree so that you can reference parents and know it will only evolve forward.
yeah man who the fuk has time to read two whole PAGES of words this aint social studies LMAO #yolo ☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺

can i get the sparknotes for your middlebrow hacker news dismissal i got SHIT TO DO SON 💩
I thought Let's Encrypt had finally launched too. :(
Great! D:

Wait, I mean :D

:P
what happened to agar.io
it is not up it says can not find server i am an addict to this game plz fix
Please modify the bindings, the directional keys are international, without a qwerty keyboard I can't play - and no, I will not modify it systemwide for just a JS game.

Nice one nevertheless!
This is a mischaracterization. For one Protect America Act addresses changes in technology that neither FISA nor AUMF directly address. Two, not section 215, not FISA, not any FISA amendments, and not AUMF permit bulk collection. And it's bulk collection that's in dispute, most Americans have far less of a problem with targeted wiretapping of likely terrorist targets even without warrants. Sensenbrenner, and others, have been quite clear the problem they have with current and previous administrations is the bulk collection policy, that there's no authorization anywhere for this.

That Sensenbrenner and others lacked sufficient concern or imagination that section 215 would be wordsmithed and construed to support something like bulk collection is fair criticism. If you are a Congresscritter wanting to have your cake and eat it too, you'd write a vague law that steers completely clear of authorizing what you don't like (bulk collection), and then act shocked when it ends up happening. And I don't think that's a big stretch considering the minority of legislation Congress puts an expiration date on, and section 215 is such, expiring next month.

So now the question is whether Congress lacks any stomach for bulk collection and just lets it expire including all of the far less controversial programs (i.e. they're considered legal, even if you may not like the law or the policy). I think at best they renew it as is, and let the full appeals court or SCOTUS look at it. But they might just scrap it and come up with a narrower replacement to reauthorize uncontroversial parts.
I'm going to write a follow up about how I wasn't mad about the feedback as much as I was mad nobody had told me sooner. We were a young company and didn't really have a management or mentorship skillset yet. We would all develop that together in the ensuing years and this was a major part of my motivation for pushing for it.
Ah, now for the important question - Was she angry or not? My answer is yes.
If all the people are currently getting a deal on rents, then all the rents are too low, and the landlords will start raising rents until they stabilize on what people are willing to pay. Nowhere does the landlords' cost come into this equation.

This whole "taxes get passed onto the consumers" fallacy is just another bit of anti-tax/anti-gubmint propaganda.
This is confusing "kind" with "nice". If your audience can handle some directness, be direct. It's okay to say, "This is a horrible idea, and I can't believe we're considering this." That can be kind when you care about the person you're talking to.

What's unkind is saying, "You're an idiot, and that's a ridiculous idea." Attacking people is not kind, but directness _can_ be kind.

On the other hand, you deserve to be shown some kindness too. If your coworkers don't listen to you, maybe it's time to start looking for a new job.
This seems like a Rand Paul issue.
I completely agree that validation is sought after in the wrong places. People feel that validation is defined by a valuation that was bloated by initial investors or by a few people saying they are interested.

That ain't the case. You need people to put their money where their mouth is. Bottom line.

Great read. Thanks Justin.
Hello HN! I'm the CEO of CaseRails ( https://caserails.com ), a legal-tech startup based in New York. We just launched an online document automation platform for lawyers that makes it really quick-and-easy for a lawyer to take a generic document (like an NDA) and personalize it for the client. Though, we do have non-lawyer customers too.

I see that my colleague from Contractually (bmulholland) gave a good answer and I agree with his sentiments.

I would add that, in a broad sense, there are probably three hypothetical markets for a law startup (defined as, something to do with legal services):

1 - you could provide legal services to consumers of legal services,

2 - you could displace legal services with something else, or

3 - you could sell something, or provide another service to, the people providing legal services.

CaseRails is an example of #3, our product is intended for lawyers themselves to use.

There aren't any examples of #1 (that I know of) because, at least in the USA, ethical regulations prohibit fee splitting with non lawyers. This means you can't have non-lawyer shareholders / investors; which means you can't raise capital in the traditional markets.

LegalZoom and RocketLawyer are good examples of #2, they try to displace your need to call a lawyer with an online service where you can get document templates. (I don't want to speak for Contractually but they might also be in this category)
The Golden Rule (treating others as you want to be treated) isn't actually very good. I prefer the Platinum Rule (treat others as THEY want to be treated)
That makes sense for undeveloped land (e.g. the Balboa Reservoir project). But there's very little of that in San Francisco. Realistically, adding to San Francisco's housing supply means replacing a lot of existing stock with higher density housing. If that higher-density housing is mostly or completely occupied by locals (by which I mean people who will be domiciled at that location), then it's a net win. But if not, then San Francisco residents end up worse off.

For example, say that a developer tore down housing for 1,000 people on some property, and then replaced it with housing for 3,000 people. That adds capacity for 2,000 people. But if 950 people were domiciled at the old property, but only 750 people are domiciled at the new property, then it's actually a net decrease in supply for people who reside in San Francisco. If the original property was old and run-down (which is what usually gets replaced in these situations), and the new property consists of units that have great appeal to wealthy people looking for a San Francisco pied-à-terre, then a situation like this is certainly possible.
OK, I guess it costs. But I say it's unwise to be miserly along such lines.
The number of weights depends on the network architecture.

In this case fully connected , 1 weight per connection .

16 inputs to 7 neurons + 7 neurons to 3 outputs + 7 biases

16x7 + 7x3 + 7 = 140

http://blog.otoro.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/03/sli...

The number of neurons is a decidable.
FYI Netflix works natively in chrome on linux, and has for a while. No need for hacky solutions like that anymore.
One might view that as a form of perfectionism - for me it all depends on what you're trying to optimize.

I've lived much of my life like that - but what's my goal here - to be right? Or to be happy? To me being happy means working towards harmonious relationships. I'm not going to pretend someone is right when they're not, but I might be a bit more diplomatic in my communication.

I'm not sure I get the morality angle. Is it immoral to chose not to contradict someone? Not in my moral code.
Checks and Balances – Rating checking account practices of 45 largest U.S. banks
Thanks for the honesty and careful articulation! I find myself to be a bit of bulldog myself, and it's hard to change ingrained habits. Thanks for the reminder!
Thinking of it another way: money is a technology for distributing wealth. Without money we would need to rely on some centralized authority, a chief or pharoah, who would directly or through a bureaucracy distribute wealth. Money allows society to allocate resources with decentralized decisions.
And it's $99 a month.
No its not that we're building a CDN... we actually use a separate CDN (Highwinds) but our system is build around the idea that we'd always have an easy infinitely extendable cloud store to handle the files.

Our core competency is not file serving, so we'd prefer not to handle it even if its strictly cheaper to do it ourselves.
I dunno. There's a balance. Kindness in some situations just isn't the right thing. But it certainly is in most situations.
Depends on many things, but if the data appears "controversial yet conclusive" then you investigate more deeply until you have ruled out just about anything else. Long time ago, I was part of a research team that sat on a 3.5 sigma result that only got stronger when we got more restrictive with the data set. We ran for two more years looking for other explanations. I was in grad school and could only think "why don't we publish?!?!" but the more experienced folks won out and upon further review, no Nobel Prizes were awarded and the reputations and funding remained in place. I think the adage "you only get to cry wolf! once" applies here.
You jest, but with NY's housing situation, every tower should be as high as reasonably possible to maximum livable space.
> To be fair, this is also incredibly exhausting

What part is exhausting?
Emotional fallout can be expensive in terms of time and mental energy.

I don't know you, so this isn't a critique of you directly, but if being kind takes special effort you're doing something wrong. It shouldn't take much work at all. You don't need to be a mind reader and try to predict peoples reactions to things, most of the time it's just being mindful of how you act in certain situations and if that behavior really makes sense (for instance: if someone comes to you with a novice question, do you make them feel welcome, or do you make them feel stupid? Either way takes the same amount of effort, but one has a much better long term payoff.)
The Definition of Social Selling
You assume I have not done so. Friend, you assume incorrectly. I have. I learned from the experience. I spoke out with passion, principle, and integrity. I joined my voice to those of similar others. I accepted no excuses and did as you demand. I acted with courage, I sacrificed, I acted selflessly for the good of others.

The world remained unmoved. And I... I gained in wisdom.

Speaking out with integrity and principle has impact to the extent that you have the ability to translate your beliefs into realty. The world has no lack of people with principles and integrity who don't agree with you. They are all also attempting to make impacts. The ones most likely to be successful and get the impact they want are the ones with the resources to back it up.

Remember - people who disagree with you are often loud, brave, and principled people willing to sacrifice who believe they are doing the right thing.

If I could sacrifice the screaming passions of every marcher in Berkeley, every Black Panther in Oakland, and every OWS camper for another Gates Foundation... I would do so in a heartbeat. Because the result would be dramatically improved lives for a great many people as resources are expended less on principled posturing by people with integrity and more towards actually doing things.

So, friend, let us dispense with the Naming of Names and Taking of Stands. Let us get on with the bit where we actually do things that help people. That is, after all, what matters.
Now the server can send the signed value somewhere else, and they can be Sam, too.

In fact, even if the server itself uses some sort of challenge-response, it can use the response anywhere that implements your policy.
I Made an Apple Watch App Concept in 15 Minutes, and So Can You
My edit's not showing up on my other post, sorry for double-replying.

> ....The pichforks didn't truly come out until the number of his non-answers on the issue. Someone saying "we support diversity" doesn't sound right when that can be instantly rebutted with "Then why is your company run by someone who donated against LGBTs?"

> It looks bad for Mozilla, and there's no good answer for that question - really!

I think this accidentally hits the nail right on the head. Eich had to go because people couldn't handle the complexity of the situation and so they chose a simplified version where everybody involved was either good or evil. The reality was Prop 8 wasn't so great, but that's a lot of baby to throw out with a very small amount of bathwater.
Optional add-on:

http://www.dji.com/product/dropsafe
Due to the general architecture, I think it's better compare Bleep with Tox.
Fortunately, that situation can be handled effectively through scale.

There is a limited number of wealthy people looking for a San Francisco pied-à-terre, and that is a market that can be exhausted without driving all other residents out. At which point standard market forces mean construction for the less wealthy will occur.
> If I were Netflix, I would use my own content (such as House of Cards) to demonstrate that it's possible to go DRM-free.

That's primarily my point, but I don't agree that DRM in necessary for business. Music is sold DRM-free, games are too (GOG). So there is no reason why video can't be. Someone just have to break the sick status quo.
Someone didn't see yesterdays playing card/get request debate.
Property tax typically doesn't go to the state at all. It's a county assessment. An argument for keeping property taxes is they tend to be more stable than income or sales taxes, and since counties tend to have less float in their budget (a large pile of county spending is on the public school system) it probably works better for them.

The idea of an aggressive mill levy on someone's additional homes seems sane: use it or sell it. I just think universality of property tax isn't actually fair, just like a $200 speeding ticket isn't fair. Indexing it somehow to your worth or income is more fair.
This is obviously the main issue. The DRM component itself is nonfree, downloaded from Adobe's servers (iirc).

With this DRM section in the official html specification, it is impossible to implement a fully html spec compliant, free software browser, which personally I think is outrageous.

At the end of the day, it's still "just" a spec, but I don't think someone (like the WHATWG previously) can just come along and "fix" this and get everyone on their side. At the very least, this almost feels like a betrayal by the w3c.

The plain truth is that no one cares about free software, even when the software (a web-standards compliant web browser) is concerning one of the greatest technological revolutions in human history so far (the internet), which is just honestly sad in my opinion.

On the topic of firefox though, I hope Mozilla keeps the DRM part of the browser an opt-in to download, rather than coming directly with the firefox package itself. Anyone know if this is still the case or not? Also, does anyone know if this DRM component is in the linux packages? (The article mentions only windows vista+.)