skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is why the liberal arts are, in fact, so critically important. It's difficult to understand the beauty of knowledge and science without also understanding it's humanity, and conversely, it's difficult to fully understand humanities without also understanding knowledge, how we know things, and the profound reality of the world around us.

Furthermore, a scientist well versed in the humanities almost to the point of spirituality will have a much easier time translating knowledge between the logical and the human. Both are intertwined, and both contain mountains of truth, and each is made better by the other.

Loren Eiseley was one such scientist.

Some good writings of his can be found here: http://www.american-buddha.com/eiseley.toc.htm
> ... and, of course, the rebuttals to this were mostly of the "no true Scotsman" flavor. "It's not the fault of scientists, it's the bad media". Let's ignore http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/ (Why Most Published Research Findings Are False) and many other similar results - we have to defend scientists because!

It seems like the worst offenders are in biology/pharmacology/genetics/biochemistry. I'm not trained in any of those fields, but it seems pretty obvious that organic life should be orders of magnitudes more complex than mechanics, materials science, aeronautics, or any of the other man-made scientific fields. They are also comparatively young subjects. We don't really understand enough about how all the pieces fit together, or even what all the pieces are, in biological processes to make much in the way of definitive statements.

But seriously, if I hear another nightly news story about how food X prevents cancer based on a study of a dozen people or the current consensus on whether eggs are good or bad for you...
Advocating positions shown likely true by science does not require a scientist at all. We don't all have to be in the lab, testing every conclusion. We have people for that.

The rest of us will do very, very well to believe the results of science. Because its the only game in town that's actually trying to get it right.
It's not silly -- it's the whole point.

Suicide bombers see a different purpose to their lives than (presumably) you and I do. By their own measure they are not doing badly, they are doing quite well.

Or consider Richard Dawkin's famous criticisms of Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa unashamedly put religion ahead material comfort among the poor she ministered too. To say she was wrong in so doing is not a statement of fact. It is a statement of ones personal values.
If your display is in your contact lens, how are you going to dismiss a notification or reject a phone call? Well maybe you just have to swipe the right way on your jacket sleeve like they did at the key note.
"... in almost all of those cases the DNA evidence was being used as the cherry on top of the evidence sundae they had already compiled..."

Not to put too fine a point on it...

but that's the whole problem DNA was supposed to solve. Cases like rape X, where all of the evidence pointed to guy A. Then we test a known serial rapist, guy B, 30 years later to find out that he actually committed rape X. The Innocence Project sails in, and in due course guy A is exonerated and sent on his way after having spent 31 years in prison. We're stuck with a sizable financial liability to the ex-prisoner. And for some reason, everyone calls this a happy ending ???

DNA was supposed to protect us from situations like that. But now you say that the evidence against guy A in rape X really would have been enough in any case... so we shouldn't read too much into the fact that the DNA samples don't match ???

I'm just confused as to what evidence would EVER prove guy A's innocence in such a system ???
Of course it's way too harsh. They're making an example out of him. The message here is: "don't even dream of circumventing the monetary system we control".

This is just a part of the American police state's burgeoning.

People will take drugs regardless of whether there's a Silk Road or not. Well, at least as long as we're still mercifully allowed to use cash, which is not for long if the masses can be successfully conditioned to accept banning it.

What's the difference between banning cannabis and banning cash? Both are just orders not to use something, backed by the threat of punishment for disobeying.
Was there something relevant in your comment?
, a more powerful and flexible HTML form element
I leave other examples to the reader. Hint: point at anything near you. It was the result of science.

As for honoring the religious who supported science. I say, to the degree they pursued religion, they shortchanged their scientific accomplishments. Consider what else Newton might have done, had he abandoned his alchemy and astrology.
Please do so, and tell HN. Many of us are paying attention.
I had physical access to the machine, but did not have a login.
I heard a company forgot about their third datacenter (second backup), as several sys-admins left the company. It was found in an old bunker below the basement of a building.
and what is left if kernel builds switch to clang?
Not Buying a Home Could Cost You $65,000 A Year
Looks like Markov chain word salad to me. Flagged accordingly.
Can't the exact same argument be made by the mob or any other organized crime that uses violence?
I run my email server (it actually does not provide any extra privacy, as it's on a linode), and 99% of the time, no, I don't have problems with spf and spam flags. (In fact, spf is great, I don't get the blame of sending spam anymore since I've set it.)

There's an odd email server here and there that suspects anything that isn't gmail, there was even a mail server once that required me to prove I exist, but those are very few, and normally single user installations.

The secret is that besides not sending spam, you must receive email. If you don't get enough email, other servers start suspecting you. And, of course, there are configuration problems - since I'm writing my own mail server, I get a few of them, but even on standard software you have to make sure you set it correctly.
That's exactly right. In the comments Homakov mentions that the $15 and $5 figures have been "adjusted for simplicity".
Why shouldn't return be considered a function?
Nit picked. Next time I'll say 'Mycenaean Greek'.
I didn't argue about the unreliability of science. Do I think such could be quantifiable by what information is available to humans today? Yes. Do I think humans without the aid of technology can say either way to the degree that science is unreliable? Maybe for tiny slivers like meta analysis papers on relatively minute subjects within science, but as a whole? I think not.
Just look at this statement:

_Its [sic] rational and reasonable to be uncritical of scientific results_

I do not believe that this person is sarcastic; I say that because I have talked to hundreds of people with the same opinion. People actually believe this. My authority is better than yours so you uncritically accepting your authority is wrong, me uncritically accepting mine is not only right but obviously so.

Ignoring the absurdity of the statement, and the mind-numbing appeal to authority - this also shows a lack of knowledge of history. When people used Aristotle as an authority 500 years ago, they did it using this same rationale: Aristotle had already done all the thinking, who are you to claim to know better?

This is just painful.
Notes on Apache Spark
1. Develop good habits and do whatever you need to keep them. It makes the rest of this list easier.
2. Keep lifting. The older you get, the more important this is.
3. Don't get addicted to caffeine and sugar.
4. Don't take any job that requires death marches.
5. Quit any job the minute they ask you to work nights and weekends.

Stay healthy, basically.
To be clear I'm not claiming that firewalls are irrelevant in the enterprise campus scenario, especially if they have DPI functions that are effective in discovering outbound control channels. Even huge corporate environments rarely have more than 10Gb/s of transit and those Palo Alto devices I talked about work fine in that scenario.

What I am saying is that hardware firewalls are not an option at scale and that Layer 3/4 protections are being pushed into the host for scale-out operators. Note that "into the host" does not necessarily mean "in the operating system". There has been great work by some operators to push these controls into the Ethernet firmware, although I'm unaware of a standards-based open way of doing such.

I'm enjoying this HN discussion, where people are disagreeing with a response to a misquote of a incorrect summary made by somebody who didn't watch the talk. :)
Ask HN: Feedback on Apple Watch gaming digest
Hi Everyone,

First time I’ve “Asked HN” and my account is only a couple of weeks old, so not sure if I’m too new here - to ask for feedback?

But, having just published for the first full month - I feel now is when your feedback could be most valuable - so giving it a go!

I’ve been working on the idea since last September - but held off launching until one week after the Apple Watch product release.

Five issues our now published.

Name:

WatchGames

Short explainer:

The best Apple Watch gaming, every week

More details:

WatchGames is a weekly (published each Friday) email newsletter that curates only the best Apple Watch game releases, reviews, stories, news and more - but without the fluff.

Feedback:

Whatever you’ve got and particularly in terms of tone, length, category subjects (news, reviews, stories, etc) - what have I missed, day it’s published, etc

Link:

http://watchgames.co

Any questions, let me know.

Thanks for your time!
Science is a method, producing statements about facts. A type of behaviour is not a fact (e.g. "killing someone"). It is statement. Therefore morality produces statements about statements. How could a method dealing with statements about facts ever be in competition with a method dealing with statements about statements? That is impossible. In other words, by comparing morality and science, you are comparing apples and oranges.
Isn't it true that using an UPDATE statement referencing the existing column's value also works?

Pseudo-code:

UPDATE account WHERE ... SET balance = balance - 5

If both sides of the transfer are handled this way, and then the balance of the transferrer is checked after to ensure it's greater than 0 (rollback otherwise), won't that suffice to handle the issue without having to use SELECT ... FOR UPDATE?

---

To further simplify this, you could include a WHERE balance > [transfer amount] clause to the transferrer UPDATE query. If the number of rows updated is 1, UPDATE the transferee's row. If the number of rows updated is 0, you're done (tell the user they don't have sufficient funds). Isn't that right?
Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean
An Apple customer's thoughts on Google I/O 2015
Be blunt: I am and it's true that there's huge chunks of the industry I rarely interact with. Might have missed plenty. I particularly appreciate you bringing the NSX security framework to my attention. However, most of what you're mentioning are features that firewalls support where my post said they needed features + assurance (aka "guards," or firewalls with security inside). Most of the firewalls, if evaluated at all, stay at EAL4 or lower: certified to stop "casual or inadvertant attempts to breach security." They don't even get pen-tested by pro's or a source review. Any pro taking time examining a unit will probably find a 0-day or bypass. Grime's reviews showed many even had unknown services running, like FTP, without telling users. They're also prone to subversion as only EAL6/7 reduces that and Snowden leaks confirmed that for many companies.

So, my comment and yours actually agree that network defense is necessary. I just added this in my original comment: (a) real endpoint security, (b) app/protocol-layer security, (c) the right features in firewall, and (d) rigorous assurance and evaluation for each. The result of these combine did resist strong attackers in the past and present. The Boeing SNS Server, for example, hasn't been compromised in 15 years despite multiple pen-tests by NSA and private labs. That's high assurance and minimum of rigor that stops nation states. Commercial firewalls are largely not designed like that. So, they have the features but not assurance of implementation or self-protection. And not integrated enough with endpoints for enforcement to be split properly between the two. See below for an example of a stronger configuration:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a425566.pdf

Back to your peer review of his list, which I appreciate given your an insider. No 1 I've seen myself and agree. No 2 yes lol. No 3 I learned from you and will repeat to anyone else not aware of these things. No 4 is THE DUMBEST THING HE SAID, has never happened, and won't happen without fundamental changes I preach about here. Enough said. No 5. If my perimiter collapses, they're seeing (a) encrypted traffic that tells them nothing or (b) plain traffic whose nodes resist their attacks. Perimeter to me is minor DLP, DOS prevention, and IDS mainly. No 6, 7, and 8. Alright, that's 3 in his favor.

Your last point is the weakest one: companies regularly spend millions on inferior or non-solutions to problems because they don't know better. How much IT industry spends on something tells us nothing about its security or quality. If you're right, then Windows, Oracle, SAP, and Cisco switches are the highest quality and most secure things out there. (Checks the CVE's and news reports.) Nevermind...
I don't have the experience to answer that, nor the specific interest to research the topic, sorry.
In other words, you want the death of journalism. Or are you telling us all you both have adblock disabled and click on ads you see on sites that make their money that way?
My first websites are still somewhat online too, as Archive.org and/or the Archive Team managed to backup the site :)
It's called a regression.

Believe it or not, there's a lot of software organizations out there that still get away with using anti-patterns like: not integrating code frequently, not using modern source control systems, not using automated tests, not doing security audits, and not doing incident reviews.
IBM now offering employees Macs for the first time
The fact that Snowden would probably get death sentence has never sat quite well with me.
Hi, I am gladful that I stumbled across this question. I am not going to tell you a sorry.

The essence of my answer first: You can heal yourself. The body follows the mind. First there is reality in your head, and then in the physical world.

Second, read the book by Dr. Joe Dispenza, called "You are the placebo". If you have a bit of patience, read the two earlier books mentioned there ("Evolve your brain" and "Breaking the habit of being yourself").

I have read a lot of books, covering spiritualist topics, healing, taoism, traditional chinese medicine, ritualist magic and psychology as an overall topic. The essence is, that what we call the rules of physics and medicine today are short-sighted and often plain damaging. One example for this is the belief that you can't change certain things.

Denying your own possibilities when they exist is a self-fulfilling prophecy, you cannot disprove it if you don't really believe in it. Doctors telling you that you have a serious illness (or just in the risk of becoming ill) are doing serious damage to you if you believe them, because your mind is making it real.

Illnesses are an expression of something going wrong, which means you have to fix it by changing how you live, what you do, and essentially, who you are. I have had some minor illnesses such as cavities and hay fever, both of which I fixed using meditation and visualization.

The books I mentioned show a practical way for us people today who essentially believe science to be "true". It builds upon that belief, and I can really recommend it if you don't have time wrapping your mind around ancient chinese belief systems.

The reason I was not going to tell you a sorry is that I don't feel sorry for you, I feel hope and I feel gratitude - there is a reality (which implies it is real and exists right now) in which you are 100% healthy, and giving your experiences of becoming healthy out to the rest of the world. It is possible, and it is your choice. I am not wishing you luck, because luck is not what you'll need. I wish you will be able to grow yourself from being a victim, to having your live in your own hands. I wish you'll be able to take action, and make decisions, and for the entire time, enjoy your process wherever it leads you.

One last word, you will be free of injuries or problems if you find yourself being free of them, it is the moment when it makes "click" in your brain, and that is the moment when reality changes. For me it was the moment when I discovered that I had no cavities, and that they are healing, and that my doctor was wrong. And in the same moment, my doctor became wrong because reality had changed. That is how it works.
Make-Up Fail (Wanted: Dead or Alive)
> Actually the compiler checks cover most of the things I’d normally unit-test, so this is probably the only non-trivial project I wrote without checks and I’m OK with that.

This is interesting. First time I read about Rust I had this gut feeling that it's design might reduce the number of unit testing cases. Someone care to comment on that?
Wildlife crime tech challenge: Win $500,000 for solutions for wildlife crime
I'm not sure if you are being rhetorical, but in case you aren't, such people most definitely exist.
I looked into Stripe recently. Unless I mis-understand the technology, it's an API, and an Application Programming Interface requires Application Programming. In other words, I would need to operate a website, physically or in the cloud, and create the program that generates credit card transactions. I would also have to manage all of the policies that PayPal covers for me, such as dispute resolution.

PayPal gives me access to USPS first class mail shipping, which USPS doesn't even offer via their own website. This saves me money on shipping costs.

Last time I looked, Amazon seemed more complicated, and oriented towards bigger businesses than mine. I don't remember what I concluded about WePay and Square.

Everything is great until it isn't -- kind of a corollary to survivorship bias I guess.
If you have an argument to make, then make it.

The previous poster didn't say he was unwilling to learn JS semicolon rules, he was saying he couldn't trust everyone he ever works with to learn them. Replying with an accusation of FUD and a link to someone ranting that it's unprofessional for JS devs to not know these rules is unnecessarily inflammatory while missing his point.
For every theorem in sociology, for example, can you show us what experiment they set up, and what results they obtained and how we can repeat their experiment in order to find counterexamples for their theorem? From there, I will acknowledge the scientific status of that one, single theorem. I will still consider every other statement in sociology to be non-science. Seriously, they must produce such data for every single one of their theorems. Physics does that. Chemistry does that. Why would sociology be entitled to the same scientific status without putting in the same effort?
They use hashes for different features though. Ie You don't pull chunks anonymously with git
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/04/12/missing_novell_serve...

One of the university's Novell servers had been doing the business for years and nobody stopped to wonder where it was - until some bright spark realised an audit of the campus network was well overdue.

According to a report by Techweb it was only then that those campus techies realised they couldn't find the server. Attempts to follow network cabling to find the missing box led to the discovery that maintenance workers had sealed the server behind a wall.
John Siracusa was right! Swift promises high level language simplicity with low level language speed. Apple are making huge improvements here.
Check out how ping actually works and you'll discover...there's no such thing as a ping protocol!

It was a silly hack that turned out to be clever and incredibly useful.
>I don't think there's a need to put a tin foil hat and demand that all personally identifiable information collection be ceased. We instead just have to make sure this info is getting used properly (within the designated scope) with according security for each problem

Smart meters are a great example of what can go wrong. Before pot growers were busted based on how much energy they used. The new smart meters can pick up individual devices based on their usage patterns. It can tell how many lights you are running, what kind, when, etc... All of this information is already being analyzed and used to catch people.
Intent absolutely matters, yes. Silk Road was promoted by the staff as primarily a drug marketplace. Ross grew mushrooms to sell on the marketplace. It had links to drugs on its sidebar. They had a doctor to give advice to drug users. It was designed specifically not to comply with the law. These are all factors when determining criminality. If a site like Amazon accidentally sold child porn (as an example) via self publishing features, then they wouldn't be liable because Amazon was designed and promoted as a way to sell legal things that follow the law, and they would action the removal of those items when brought to their attention. These would make a strong case that there was no criminal intent on Amazon's part and that the fault was with a third party and so nothing would come from it.

It is extremely obtuse to act as if this sets a scary precedent By reducing the situation to absurd levels. Context has always mattered and will continue to matter.
The affordable care act should protect you and your company from rate increases due to preexisting conditions. This practice is now illegal.
Should of included: I've also created a companion (medium) publication (WatchGames Originals) to tell the stories of the Apple Watch game makers - I then curate these each week in the digest. https://medium.com/watchgames-originals
This, and most of the other arguments in the whole thread, are so highly simplistic. The links between science and humanity are many and complex, and vice versa. There is no winner, there is no right side. They build on each other, enhance each other, and neither science not the humanities has any real meaning in isolation.

Really, the whole dichotomous argument between the two is absolutely ridiculous. We need fewer people on the sides and more who are truly bridges.
From wikipedia:

"Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge"[2]) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe."

From such definition, if I could point at every person and say it was the result of systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of a testable explanations and predictions about the universe, it wouldn't be a stretch for one to think that such seems to be in favor of an omniscient being :P

Consider that there was probably some function of Newtons alchamey and astrology experience that allowed him to put forth other ideas that we are willing accept from testable hypothesis… or that had their been no Newton, the phenomena that he described, would have still existed, yet people at that time would continued to have no testable understanding of it.
ah, right ok. thanks!