skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Except they haven't. At all. They may have said some stupid things, but that's a different thing entirely. There was no event of "destroying data in response to an FOI request," - or if there was, there's no direct evidence of it in the leaked emails. And yes, I have read them.

You chose your words very carefully.

Emails (regarding AR4) were deleted. Phil Jones did say "I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone". But yes, it's true no one admitted to deleting the files that later turned up missing.

It's not enough evidence to convict them in court, but it is enough evidence for the rest of us not to trust them.

No, the burden of proof is on those who want to show that the null hypothesis, that human-produced CO2 has the potential to cause direct harm through accelerated warming, is incorrect. The reason this is the null hypothesis isn't because the scientists say so, it's because it's the best physical model we have.

Your comment reflects a complete lack of knowledge of how the scientific process works.

a) Science can't tell you what the correct null hypothesis is. That's a completely subjective matter.

b) When engaging in hypothesis testing, the standard procedure is to take the opposite of what you want to prove as your null hypothesis. Trying to prove cigarettes cause cancer? Then you take "cigarettes don't cause cancer" as your null hypothesis.

If you are taking AGW as the null hypothesis, you are assuming that which you need to prove.
A thing that, I think, is often overlooked is that when you start at something like this at a very young age you can miss important lessons. I don't have a concrete example, exactly, but I literally cannot remember starting to program - I just always have. The upside of that is that a ton of stuff is deeply internalized in me that I know newbies have a hard time "getting" at first. The downside, though, is probably the first 10 or 12 years of my programming life I spent doing things in weird ways with bad abstractions because I had no one to show me otherwise. (And at first I may have been too young to even grasp some abstractions anyway.) That can be a good learning experience because I learned a lot from "first principals" so-to-speak, but it also means that for many many years my programming skills were not well-directed and the process was extremely inefficient. By starting later in life you can avoid wasting so much time. It's not as hard to "catch up" to someone like me who has been doing it my whole life as you might expect. (Also, there's this neat thing called "The Internet" now... :)
The backlash is understandable, considering how people in the valley worship arrington and TC's influence, but after arrington's post yesterday, I really fail to see what's wrong with the device other then the fact that arrington is whining about it. He's pissed that they moved forward with the IP that they rightfully deserve, and everyone rushes to his defense? I'm pretty sick of listening to gossip.

I hear no discussion about the specs of the device. Let's discuss the merits of the device and other tablets like it. What can be improved? What can apple do better?
You never "learn to program" and then just kick back and rest on your laurels. If you do, technology will soon overtake you. Good programmers are always learning.

Exactly. Programming is like being a doctor or a lawyer where the right term in those fields is to say you "practice (law|medicine)." We programmers should really get together and adopt that terminology.
What is "national sovereignty" but the loss of our regional, state rights, and that too, a loss of our communal rights in villages.
I have a classmate that started his undergrad when he was 24 and were almost completely clueless when it came to programming, computers and nerd culture in general.

Two years in hes hacking on side projects during lectures, referencing xkcd in casual conversation and has found areas of interests where hes more knowlegable than anyone else in my program where some of us have been into these types of things for as long as we can remember.

I know it hasn't been easy for him as the learning curve is rather steep but it flattens out so just don't give up, try to work the problems and questions when you have to (stackoverflow.com and vark.com are great depending on the size and difficulty) and you'll pick things up pretty quickly and I don't think you're starting out quite as bad as he did.

I started programming when I was 11 or 12, so I'm not really sure I can give you a satisfactory answer to the last question. I also learn new things every day so I wouldn't say I'm done and I hope I never will be.
I've crossed the Canadian border maybe 50 times with never a problem (and often a couple boxes of Cuban cigars in my wheel well).
Shrouded in secrecy, decision makers gambled and Harvard lost
Browsers were desgined from the beginning to parse HTML fast. JavaScript was added later and optimized much later. Doing e.innerHTML = "some markup" will be faster than making function calls to do createElement, etc. because these calls have to go between JS and the underlying C(++) environments and back. And knowing that I might optimize my code accordingly where it might make a difference. In other words if I am adding 500 elements to a document I am going to do it by making the browser parse HTML, which will not involve the JS lib at all. Doing this kind of a test is useless since it will never happen in the wild. Instead let's test selector speeds etc. We could also test event handler assignment but here too i would use jQuery's live() and then binding takes almost no time for any number of elements.
I also doubt they licensed the image from Avatar to market their device. This is generally a no-no and with the attention it is getting, I expect they will get a C&D letter to take that off. Also does that mean it has a built in Torrent app? ;-)
Firstly, please site at least a news article on the case.

Also under the law, a police dog is an officer, an army dog is a soldier, a search and rescue dog is typically a fireman. Also, depending on the US state, and if it's in any other western country, animals have rights and injuring a dog is a criminal act, and when it's owned by a cop you can be sure as hell you'll be charged with animal abuse. If you're lucky, you won't be charged with both and won't be sued civilly by the officer in question for damaging property.

IMHO when a German Shepherd latches onto your arm and is attempting to force you to the ground, you do as it says. Also when there's a half-dozen cops (usually 1 for the dog team, and 2-4 cops called in for suspected drug possessions) shouting "Stay down, stay down! DO NOT FIGHT THE DOG!" then you do what they say.

Fighting the dog only does 1 of 2 things. 1st it angers the dog, which will mean it clamps down harder and will likely mean it breaks the skin (which it is trained not to do), which means any attempt to remove your arm can literally shred the muscle from your bone. 2nd if you're lucky and get free with your arm intact, running turns that highly trained dog into nothing more than a wolf, it will no longer bite your arm or try to pin you down, when it gets you it's likely to be going for the throat to kill you.
a curious mind will be a learning mind.
any idea how to port this line of code to work on a MS Windows ruby platform?

%[sh -c '#{results.join(" | ")}']

~
I've tried a few things but keep getting this:
Running: sh -c 'grep -e hello access.log'

This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual way.
Please contact the application's support team for more information.
The pictures on this page look better: https://thejoojoo.com/sites/accessories
Maybe he assaulted the officer in the kneecap with his groin.
Igor, as I said below, testing elements building is only one test and you can ignore it if disagree.

> Instead let's test selector speeds etc.

Actually this is what's pointless, both of the frameworks do it by using native features of the modern browsers and results will about the same for any framework.

> i would use jQuery's live() and then binding takes almost no time for any number of elements.

Are you sure about that?
Many of apple's product shots look like photoshop too. I never saw an "all images are simulated" disclaimer..
I think you can become a decent programmer quickly, especially now when there are so many good books, high-order languages and tutorials on the subject. To master programming (like everything else) takes a lot of effort thought (check out Peter Norvig's "Teach yourself programming in Ten years" [1]). But even if it takes 10 years you will only be 34 and have about ~25 work years left in you... 25 years, that's a long time.

So if you are really liking the idea of programming, start small and do a small project - - like creating a site for one of your hobbies. I can recommend checking out Dive Into Python[2] and Why's (Poigant) Guide to Ruby [3]. There are lots of great (and free) books on programming out there, so you don't really have to invest any money...

Good luck :)

[1] http://norvig.com/21-days.html

[2] http://www.diveintopython.org/

[3] http://mislav.uniqpath.com/poignant-guide/
From the images it looks great; I wouldn't pre-order it though from them directly, only if it came via Amazon or if I can check it out in a store.

I would assume if you can pre-order via Amazon, they have "vetted" the product.
Loads of people learned programming when they were older than 24. It's not a problem.
Perhaps that's something that is only done in advertising, I've never skeptically reviewed Apple's website.
Live binds one event handler to a parent element and then simply watches for any events of that type to bubble up. bind adds 500 handlers to 500 elements. live is faster in theory. Will write a test to show in practice.

Yes simple selectors are pointless. How about '.Class .child:visible:not(.test):eq(1)'?
This is a classic scenario where a human is overspending and don't have any insight to economics. He also thought he knew his domain, while he didn't. The SEO-guy was ripping him off, and he should have taken legal action against the SEO-scam that effectively pulled the plug on his cashflow.
I know Peter.

He's not the guy most likely to blow up and punch someone.

About the only point of information that might serve to remotely spin this in the border guards' favour is that Peter is just shy of seven feet tall: if you're of average height, he looms.

I gather the assault indictment stated that he was trying to enter the United States when the incident took place. As he was in fact leaving one wonders what other lies the border patrol are telling?
A thought, perhaps this like exercise? If you workout for an hour, you'll generally get tired and need to rest. However, if you work out everyday for a week, you'll get stronger and be able to workout longer and harder.

Suppose moral fiber works this way? At first, as you work on your behavior, you can only do so much and simple sacrifices seem like a huge burden. As you continue, you conscience becomes stronger and doing 'the right thing' becomes more the norm and former behavior seems more extreme.

---

Also possible, that 'virtuous consumption' is pursued for social status and not virtue, and so people who engage in it for this reason are entitled jerks as a matter of course.
It hasn't even actually come to market yet.
Agreed, I've been in and out of many countries in my time, including multiple times through Canadian customs and through the US border. I've been greeted by surliness before, but usually less than I get in a coffee shop or supermarket checkout from people who are being paid to be nice.

My first time into Canada had me dragged through the entire process. Questioned, threatened, bag searched, more threatening, etc. In the end the other officers were telling the one dealing with me to lay off, I overheard one say, "He's got nothing, you've got to let him go through." The man who searched my baggage was downright courteous, he even complimented me on my packing skills.

The first thing in the article that made me question WTF was when he got out of the car. In my experience with police, you never get out of the car until you're directly told to. Whether he was told to or not, I didn't get from the article. If he wasn't told to, that would have at least got him slammed to the ground and handcuffed.

This wasn't his first time crossing the border, so this seems a little erroneous. He should have known how to behave at a border crossing, what he did to let this occur is beyond me. I've been greeted at customs by four cops with MP5's (gotta love the Spanish hospitality), and I doubt a single one had less-than-lethal rounds in them. I acted courteous even though I was speaking a foreign language, the immigration officer was a bit abrupt but I let it slide. The captain, or whatever he was, of the squad asked how good was the book I was reading (a Terry Pratchett novel I believe it was) and wished me a good vacation. There was a lot more stress there than at any other land or airport border crossing I've done.
I've been programming since I was about 9, I'm now 39, and still learning. There's no end to learning, just new perspectives to see. I believe your starting environment can have a significant effect on your progress. If you pick something too obtuse and low level it may get hard to grasp some of the basic concepts you will need to master. These days I'd recommend JavaScript since you can start quickly in the broswer without having to learn an IDE. Also having the DOM to play with right away is fun, easy with obvious visual feedback that what you are doing is working (or not). I'd also start simply with the basic language, from scratch (without a library). Just learn the language and syntax. Get the O'Reilly JavaScript book make your dead simple index.html with inline JavaScript and see what you can do. Only once you get the basics, migrate to a framework (jQuery's a good choice). Oh, you'll want FireBug (or something similar too).
I love the guy from the Small Business Administration's comments being so stern. Typical. Although there's no indication in what he says that he's talking about the subject of this article at all.
> Live binds one event handler to a parent element and then simply watches for any events

It's kinda different story and rather a hack than a standard approach. And it's not always a cace, because it will handle the callbacks slower than a direct bind and therefore not always appropriate.

In any case it's not what the test is intended to do. We test standard operations, that's all. Testing live with bind is like comparing apples with oranges.

> How about '.Class .child:visible:not(.test):eq(1)'?

Do you mean non-standard css-selectors? There is nothing to test, rightjs simply doesn't support them

With rightjs you always can do it like that

$$('.class').filter('visible');
everyone rushes to his defense

That's definitely not the feeling I got reading the comments on HN.
This article sets off my bullshit detector, and let me explain why.

First, it's throwing red meat to the dogs. The internet and tech community is extremely sci-fi and video game friendly. This was one of us, and bad things happened to him.

Second, it's not a news article. There's no presumption of being two sides to the story. One side is given, by a friend, and a call to action given out. Were the officers interviewed? Was the video-tape released (And you know they have video tape)? Nothing of the barest minimum was done to provide some sort of context. The purpose of this piece is clear: it's a call to action, an editorial, an opinion piece. Don't confuse it with a news article.

Third, there's lots of loaded language in here -- "was subject to a beating and arrest", and "the gang of border guards", "and losing it may cost him his entire life" etc.

Look -- I'm not taking sides. Border guards screw up and are badly-trained sometimes. That's why we have video on all border crossings. On the other hand, people crossing the border have been known not to be able to handle submitting to requests from people in authority for various reasons. There is a very good case for using physical force on occasion. I simply don't know what happened.

What do I do when someone starts singing sweet songs of injustice that sounds wonderful to my libertarian senses? That's when I start asking questions.

I would like to know more about this, and from a non-aligned source, before being able to form any kind of opinion at all.
I think if he did actually assault a border guard, he would never have been let go (edit: so quickly). The surface facts that we know and can believe (detained and released) smack of punishment for some small slight. His punishment (beating, citing for a felony a being immediately released) is completely consistent with many other cases of people saying the wrong thing.

Make no mistake, when you really do cross the actual line with a cop/border guard, you will pay with all the force of the law (and then some).
Big company benefits are an effective drug
The GI Plan diet
The models right now come across incomplete at best, so spending trillions on that risks destroying a lot of health, wealth, happiness that those resources could be deployed to instead. If there's global warming, what's the extent of it? How much is caused by humans? What are the pros and cons of climate change? And so on. These questions aren't answered, and there's recommendations for trillions of dollars of resources

My first thought (speaking as a scientist myself) was that ofcourse these models are incomplete. Climate change is difficult. Hell, predicting the weather with any degree of accuracy 7 days out is difficult. To put together a cohesive document spanning hundreds (thousands?) of scientists and have them all agree with its contents seems like an almost impossible task for me to envision. I have trouble agreeing with my own co-workers sometimes and we work on the same funded project!

The argument about spending the money elsewhere is complete bull. Have you ever applied for government grants... lets say from the NSF? The money is always globally appropriated and the grants are always applicable to many fields. You don't get funded based on opinion. You get funded over a 30-40 page proposal that you clearly state your objectives and what you will use the money for. Then you are put through a thorough vetting process where the granters look at ALL the proposals being made (undoubtedly there are hundreds) and choose the one that meets their criteria the best. They also look at the track record of each of the groups based on prior research and the like. On some governmental projects, they'll even tell you certain objectives that you propose which they will not fund.

People make the same point about stem cell research and it drives me crazy.

There is always benefits to funding basic scientific research. Just look at the output from Fermilab and CERN over the last 20 years--MRIs and the Internet most notably.

But getting back to the climate change models. These are enormous problems to tackle. They have supercomputers chugging on data 24-7. Just envision trying to track cloud formation to see if there is a pattern in storms-- you've got to find some way to measure all that and then you have to compute it to form a predictive model. I'm almost certain there will be missing or omitted data. Science is not clean.
I've been to the EU. They can be jerks there too.
A friend of mine had some success scraping Yahoo Finance.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=GOOG

There's a CSV download option.
I'm 57. I started programming at 52. I was an electronic engineer and the most I ever did was assembly and some C. I own some fast food restaurants and my wife suggested we get online. Long story short, I couldn't spell "web developer" but now I are one.
But you know what they're showing exists and you won't get screwed over. Trust.
But this spirit is alive and well even here on HN

That assertion could use some quotes to back it up. My perception of the marketing talk here is completely different. I think you are suffering from confirmation bias.

Remember, the more sure you are of something, the more you are likely to be blinded to its flaws.

That's tautological. "You don't see any reason to believe in a secret conspiracy? That's because it's so secret that there's no evidence!". Being aware of possible flaws is orthogonal to being sure about something. Hell, most of the time 'being sure' means 'having a balanced opinion, because you are aware of the different sides of the story'. Of course, while being critical of the question whether you are aware of the different sides of the story, etc. It's caveats all the way down, even when you are 'sure'.
oh the irony. VIM hacks presented in flash. You moron.
In short... no. It's going to take dedication on your part, to get up to speed, but in months you should be able to code, and in months/years if you like, do this professionally. I think with many things in life, if you really enjoy something you'll excel at it regardless of preconceived "talent". Also, its best not to ask for permission to try something since some people will say no, just go with it and act like you don't know any better in terms of likelihood to succeed.
If we are describing formal logic, then fine. (Although actually, not even fine there, really. There is a fairly powerful theory of "conversational implicature" that I studied once upon a time: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicature/ It tries to tease out some of what makes conversation (which is gappy and missing a lot logically speaking) as effective as it is.)

If we are describing human conversation, then - um - I call bullshit. If you give advice, you most certainly imply (for a suitably non-formal definition of 'imply') authority, knowledge, etc. about the matter you give advice on.

Your example - or the way you spin it out - is very odd. If you give directions to some coffee shop, we should be able to assume that you know where the coffee shop is. I suppose at the very least we should be able to assume that you believe that you know where the coffee shop is. The guy gave advice on backing up - he passed along someone else's advice, and said he it was essential advice. The relevant switch for your analogy would be asking him to be able to describe the code in rsync or dd or whatever. Nobody is doing that. They're simply pointing out that he didn't practice what he preached (with various degrees of unfortunate serves-him-right schadenfreude, but never mind that for the moment).

Answering a question implies a claim of authority. Offering advice on the internet (unsolicited) is the equivalent of building a freaking billboard with directions to the coffee shop.
The device could just be streaming the trailer or viewing a promotional image. I'm not sure about the legality. Fair use?
Filing may get them nothing, but he can get an injunction that prevents FG from launching the product and thus getting funding for a coming legal battle. I bet the shortage of money would make them more amenable to Arrington's allegations of who owns the IP...

Looks increasingly like MA found some company who could develop a product and that could be bullied out of the deal when it's ready to be taken away.
The events surrounding this device are unfortunate. It's pretty cool to me that a small company was able to build something that consumers seem to want but none of the big players have provided (yet). However, I'm still on the sideline till Apple releases their tablet. My main requirement is a modest level of synergy at the OS level because I don't live on web-apps. Certainly not everyone requires this but I do if I'm spending upwards of $500+. Had the joojoo launched at $200, I probably wouldn't be as picky about it.