skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> That's what happened with the housing bubble. Blaming banks is easy, and certainly they did a lot of shady stuff. But nobody forced people to take on mortgages they couldn't hope to pay. Nobody forced kids to take out $100k in loans to go to a dream school instead of a state school.

Really?

We're told, almost from day one, that the best path to success in America is through a college education.

We're also told that the American dream is to buy your own house.

Furthermore, we're told to follow our dreams, chase our passions, that nothing can stop us, and that we shouldn't let anything or anyone get in our way. We can be anything we want to be so long as we put in hard work.

How much financial literacy training did you get in high school? I went to private Catholic high school, and I didn't get any. Most people will say that's Mom and Dad's job. Wait, they're too busy working trying to pay for healthcare, make sure there's food in the pantry, and gas in the car.

The claims of personal responsibility and caveat emptor can only go so far. When the culture you live in is literally teaching you the opposite, it's not enough to blame the buyers. Everyone is to blame.
Right. I'm biased since I work at Justworks, but I'd argue that going w/ a PEO like Justworks (or Trinet in your case) offers both a better setup experience and a better software experience.

People talk about the fact that PEOs let you basically group-buy benefits (which is how you were able to get ~30% off your health plans), but the other nice thing about the PEO model is that it lets us bring everything (payroll/benefits/compliance) in-house, so we have full control over the entire experience and you don't have to worry about integrations.
If we were only concerned with making accurate predictions, then all of that would be fine.

But the point of the article is less about the accuracy of our predictions, and more about the effects that our priors may have on others.

If a female technologist attends a tech conference and gets asked 100 times "are you in HR?", it's very likely that she'll feel unwelcome and discouraged. And her reaction to the questions will have absolutely nothing to do with whether the people doing the asking had a "prior" or a "bias".

Creating a welcoming atmosphere for women in technology means that you avoid asking that question despite the fact that the prior may be accurate.
Stepping through the dreck of Emory's arguments[1], the only substance I can find is claim that all these folks are libertarians or right-ward sympathizes (It's not true that everyone defending Snowden is Libertarian but that's only one problem with Emory's off-kilter claims and argument-style).

I'd view myself as left-to-far-left with zero sympathies to libertarian politics as such. But any claim that all the libertarians are working together seems preposterous. Libertarianism appeals to geeks, constitutionalists and other sectors of the American population who tend to take it's positions seriously.

[1] http://spitfirelist.com/news/snowdens-ride-part-i-eddie-the-...
I posted this because there have been a fair number of articles lately about rachets, liquidation preferences and unicorn pricing.

There is a paper that is linked to that is a great read:
https://www.fenwick.com/Publications/Pages/The-Terms-Behind-...

> The protections, known among investors as structuring or ratcheting, can inflate a unicorn’s indicated valuation 10 percent to 25 percent, according to Rick Kline, a lawyer at Goodwin Procter whose firm does legal work on start-up and initial offering financings.

The issue at hand is that late stage, or Mezzanine, funding rounds tend to push up valuations whit the down side of ratchets for the private equity firms.

The private equity firms don't mind the valuation as they have downside protection. The founders have their large ownership percentage, its the employee's who are last in line to reap the benefits who stand to loose the most in these types of deals.
An email reply would have been nice, but thanks all the same and good luck in your endeavours.
http://rosalind.info/problems/list-view/
It's the 'bioinformatics stronghold' at Rosalind- I feel like explanations I might give would be lacking, but these being practice problems in genomics, they might explain it better! :) Certainly there's a lot of statistical modeling involved, but just as much, it's a matter of getting a large number of command line programs to work together and yield a usable result! Many tools that do not all play nicely together. XD

https://tutegenomics.com/ is the place I'm interning at right now, part time, while I also help at a lab at university. That website is pretty interesting, as well, you might find- and I'd best get back to work for now. Ask me any other questions you have, though, I'd be happy to help, just a little short on time at the moment. :)
The liquidation preferences helps makes the investment make a whole lot of sense.
To be a bit pedantic, stealing classified documents is a violation of 18 USC § 1924 ("Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material") and publicly sharing them is a violation of 18 USC § 798 ("Disclosure of classified information").

Treason is defined in 18 USC § 2381 (pursuant to Article III definitional constraints) as a citizen of the United States "lev[ying] war against [the US] or adher[ing] to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere."

In this, US law follows the arguments of Blackstone, who believed that high treason, more so perhaps than any other crime, must be precisely defined and delineated ("For if the crime of high treason be indeterminate, this alone ... is sufficient to make any government degenerate into arbitrary power"). Madison warned in The Federalist that only a narrow Constitutional definition of treason could protect citizens from "new-fangled and artificial treasons" enacted to serve political factionalism. Arguably, were Snowden to be convicted of treason for exposing questionable government activity, it would be a textbook case of constructive treason, precisely that which the Founding Fathers sought to prevent.

Now, Snowden has been tried in the media as being guilty of treason (perhaps most famously by Richard Clarke), but that, I think, is a tough row to hoe, even in a post-9/11 America; the only "enemies" the US is specifically at war with are al-Qa'ida-affiliated terrorists, and there's just no evidence that Snowden had an "intent to betray" the US to terror groups.

Disclosures relating to, e.g., China or Europe are non-treasonous, as we are not at war with any of those states; in the same way, Jonathan Pollard was convicted of espionage due to his spying against the US for Israel, but his actions did not fit the definition of treason.

In summary, the charge of "treason" sets an extremely high legal bar, one that Snowden's actions -- while unquestionably illegal -- almost certainly do not rise to. He is a criminal on the run, certainly; a hero, possibly; a traitor, not at all.
I read this as Zenefits business model is so good that it's pissing off the entrenched lazy incumbents.
By J. Thomas AND Thomas Cover. Even worse combination than Stephan-Boltzmann law or Albert-Barabasi networks.

The book itself is great, IMHO the best intro to information theory and entropy.
A lot of people have known about the surveillance the whole time. I found out through friends working at ISPs many years before any Binney went public.

I told a lot of people. I don't think many of them believed me at all. Even after room 641A was documented by the New York Times, talking about the surveillance programs I personally knew of in an online discussion was always met with demands for proof or ridicule.

Only after Snowden does the general public accept the truth.
Society should care for all its members. If that's "non-economic behavior", so be it.
Technically, a contract requires a "meeting of minds." If you don't understand it, it is not a valid contract. Now, practically, this argument will only go so far with a judge. the presumption is that you read and understood it before you signed it. It can act as a defense, however, in cases where a person can be argued to be mentally "deficient" (mentally ill, low-IQ, a child, et cetera), and possibly also in cases where a contract is excessively or deliberately hard to understand.

I don't tend to worry too much about TOS as it is questionable whether I have truly entered into a contract in the first place. Most of the more egregious clauses would never be enforceable (you can't sign away your rights no matter what the contract says), and most companies are smart enough not to test it in a court of law. Finally, if it all comes to a head, the worst likely consequence is that I will simply have the service cut-off.

In common law, the idea of "reasonableness & fairness" is there, too. It is simply not codified because it doesn't need to be.
[0]http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tension_myositis_syndrome#Medic...

The claim here is that a significant proportion of these illnesses are psychogenic; even if your anecdote was convincing it would do nothing to challenge the original argument, as you could easily be part of the 47%[1].

Furthermore, you base your conclusion on the severity of pain you experienced, in your opinion, being beyond what's possible for a psychogenic illness. You don't offer evidence to support this opinion, and, as there are many types of psychological distress that drive people to ending their own lives, I find it unconvincing.

In any case, I hope you keep an open mind and find an effective way to manage and improve your health. The lifts recommended in other parts of this conversation might be more in line with your values.
Grommet by HP – User Experience for the Enterprise
I just can't think of many situations when a dynamically/weakly typed program produces a meaningful result in that case. In my experience the errors are the same in both the (strong/static) case and the (weak/dynamic) case, with the only difference being whether the issue shows up at compile time or runtime. Dealing with N runtime issues is slower than fixing N compiler errors when you discover runtumr problems one at a time, but compiiler errors you get in batches of up to N.
Why is tracking radicalization in the Muslim world a bad thing for Google? The less conflict around the world means there are more people looking at ads.

Unlike the Cold War and the military–industrial complex, Google is actively pushing for 'peace'.
It's trivially easy to detect in-browser (with mediaElement.canPlayType()). Modernizr detects HLS support out of the box.
Selenium is one of the many drivers it can use. This is a DSL for driving a browser.
Show HN: FotoFox – save 20x photos and videos on your phone
It looks like an incremental release. Not a bad idea considering how many bugs / issues Yosemite had. Hopefully, El Capitan fixes most of them.
I'm going to say no. It isn't because software engineering is unimportant. It is because you don't know what impact you wish to make. You asked the wrong question. You ask "Can a software engineer help change the world?" when the question is really "How useful is software engineering to a person who will change the world?" Perhaps you can see the difference.

The people who stand upon the ends of our levers are there because they have already decided the direction in which they wish to push.

You cannot guarantee that any skill will help you until after you have decided what you want the world to do for you. Once you have decided upon your end, the means to it should become more clear.
C'mon dude, look at the site you're on.
Ancient El Niños triggered Baja bunny booms
How can we deploy public Maven artifacts without a repository?
"Make an impact", "change the world".

You can certainly do that working at NSA (or FSB).

If you want to do good, then becoming a software developer (or accountant, or statistician) is not enough in itself.

It is what you then choose to do with your knowledge that determines that. And luck.

However, beware [1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_...
This isn't going to solve the stated problem at the top: Staged scenes.

They are quite common in certain areas and even journalists fall for them all the time, this smartphone app will only be worse.
You have to look at this in a different light. Making a difference as Software Engineer is possible. But digging deeper into the root of how its possible is not a career related move. Many people make tremendous contributions everyday (i.e. See Github) in many fields everyday. However, your determination and drive as an individual will deter your actual affect on the world. To put it simply:

We choose to become leaders. We choose to change the world. No one is born* into it*

In the massive wealth of technology and information we have today, it is very much possible to become successful as an engineer. But much too often do people outweigh the failures of the many with the successes of the few. Think of how many startups have failed before one actually succeeded. It is ungodly and daunting to look at the statistics but that should never stop someone. It should drive you as a professional in not becoming one of the many and deciding to fight to become one of the few.

TL:DR; I do not believe that being a software engineer alone gives us all the capability of changing the world. It must be coupled with drive and determination before it becomes an option
I tried a few group chatting app before but im not very satisfied. I would definitely give this a try.
Come tell us that story again in 20 years.
> LOGGING FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUND THREADS AT ONCE

Or, you could just make a logging serial queue that you send all log messages to; that way there's no risk of activity on the main thread slowing down your logging. In (Obj-)C:

static queue_t queue;
void log (NSString *message) {
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
queue = dispatch_queue_create("logging", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
});
dispatch_async(queue, ^{
NSLog(message);
});
}
Indeed you are correct. Thanks for the pedantic details!
For anyone else who's wondering where the actual information is: you have to scroll up, not down. Far from obvious on a mobile device.
Welp... it looks like OS X is about to discover tiling window management lite. ;)
You won't be able to have a large impact as just a software engineer, but you can do a little bit. If you really want to change the world in a big way, you have to be a businessman and leverage the power of others' efforts.
seems a bit mean to me honestly ... i mean I guess most people would raise an eyebrow at a 16-digit code but still ...

Not that nice of a way to say "Welcome to the team"
Another truly amazing fact: It's one of the very few Qt applications that has proper docking - e.g. you can dock windows in any of your floating windows (much like Visual Studio), and something that neither Qt4 or Qt5 support internally: http://nucleic.github.io/enaml/docs/examples/ex_dock_area.ht...
These are very insightful and well articulated comments. I'd like to find some additional reading material and authors who propound similar ideas, in addition to Cicil Rhodes and Peter Dale Scott.
Carlyle's position on slavery is not compatible with your summary.

Agreed.

and, I'll trepidatiously infer, Yarvin's (after correcting for modernity)

Since Yarvin is on this thread, he can clarify his actual views if he so wishes.

I think it is possible to cite Carlyle, and to point out that Carlyle made better predictions than the abolitionists, without believing that all black people should be re-enslaved, without believing that chattel slavery is the optimal solution for people with an IQ under 85. I think one can draw from Carlyle while still being a good person.

I think his positive views are generally cryptic because his goal is not to produce some plan of action, his goal was to provoke and to get us to think critically about whether we are actually as moral and righteous as we think we are. We like to think of ourselves as being morally superior to Carlyle. But the counter argument is that when we try to abolish slavery in a righteousness holy war, we often end up in a worse state of general vagrancy and violence or even a worse state of exploitation (eg, share cropping) or a socialized form of slavery (eg, workfare). So rather than being holy and righteous, we should think about what kind of long-term paternalistic structures would actually work best for all involved. I don't that making this argument makes someone a bad person, or worthy of being purged.
> Metal is coming to Mac, paving the way for new levels of realism and detail in games and other apps.

I'm guessing this is yet another API like Mantle/Vulkan that is also seated comfortably in the Apple walled garden and increases the development costs: awesome!
The prior jott.com was a voice memo transcription company purchased by Nuance back around 2010. Random tidbit.
> And "whether you are able to avoid injury or not" while trying to train up to that goal in the time period suggested depends on so many factors, like body type and genetics.

Not so. You get injured when you exceed your body's ability to sustain the load. You have to be aware of those limitations and work actively on building the ability to exceed them. In weight-lifting that means 1) proper form and 2) knowing when to stop. The former is easier to attain than the latter, but if you can do both, then you can avoid injuring yourself while still making gains.

> "Anyone who has experienced X must recognize the simple effectiveness of X" pretty much defines being a zealot for X.

That's ridiculous. I've experienced driving a manual transmission and recognize the simplicity of the system and that it gives you a better connection to your engine than an automatic does. Even so, I drive an automatic. If I had a sports car, I'd want a manual, but not for my primary vehicle.

I've done many, many things to keep in shape over the years. Starting Strength is great, but it's by no means the only or even best way to do that. That would imply perfection, which doesn't exist. What it is is effective at doing what it sets out to do. Which many other approaches and plans don't have.

What's great about SS is that you don't have to throw your whole life into it to experience gains. Just follow the program and you'll get stronger. If you didn't get stronger you weren't following the program. Many of the things I've tried didn't have this property. I took dance classes for a year before I realized I either needed to be rich enough to afford a private tutor or to have been dancing since I was eight to really get it right, and if I'm not getting it right, there are better ways to accomplish fitness goals.
I've had +25 lbs to 1RM simply by using reverse grip.

I posted a link to an article that shows the 50th percentile is around 180lbs for males. People always underestimate their deadlift. They don't realize they're using some of the strongest muscles in their bodies.

I think people also don't get a true 1RM on DL because they're scared of hurting something (and admittedly n00bs that aren't cautious often hurt themselves). It takes a month or two of getting comfortable with the technique before you can take your first accurate 1RM.
Can you elaborate? I don't have the slightest idea what you are trying to imply and it seems I'm not alone.
Apple iOS 9 announced
It which point the news agency could make a big deal out of it, probably not worth the hassle.
I mean you can search for bad stuff about google on google and find results - they havent filtered that either
No it's not. In order to establish a TLS connection, you'd have to do a revocation check. Can't perform that if you need a TLS connection to get the CRL.

As far as the certificate, I'm guessing there are many, many checks as to the authenticity of the key before it ships.

Plus, they'd have to use a cert from another CA, since theirs are not trusted yet. That's not elegant in a process that is used to start CAs.
You work for Justworks, but talk about the product like you don't work for them.
Also they offer:

>Hot meals prepared on site, free drinks, fruits and snacks

Young people are dumb and think of dinner at work as a perk, rather than a red flag
that the company abuses its employees and steals their personal time.

Why have friends and family when you can spend your nights and weekends at the office with your coworkers and manager?
Why would anybody want to be able to pick 400 pounds off the floor with relative ease enough to spend 156 hours a year on it? It seems roughly on the same level as spinning a basketball on your fingertip in terms of usefulness.
"dragging windows to the sides of your desktop will auto-fill that side of the screen, saving time spent on re-sizing windows to fill unused space."

I've gotten so used to this feature from Windows and various Linux desktops, I think I would be pretty lost without it.
"If you speak the truth, have a foot in the stirrup." [1]

[1] http://www.quotes.net/quote/34890
> But the privacy of their chats and photos seems pretty important to them, so I question the validity of this stance. Maybe thanks to Snapchat for making this type of feature easy and accessible.

A) Anyone who wants to bypass this protection and is slightly tech savvy can.

B) The illusion of safety is more dangerous than a true lack of safety. You can't be betrayed if you don't trust in the first place.
The marketing copy : "Google Ideas builds products to support free expression and access to information for people who need it most — those facing violence and harassment."

The Reality : "WHAT IT DOES : MAKES DATABASES SEARCHABLE"
> then why not reject all women?

Because there is often a CAUSAL link between the degree and the set of qualifications relevant and related to the job at hand. The link between skill and gender is not CAUSAL.

You're pretending like there's no causal link between education and capability. You are wrong. Period. Hiring someone based upon degree is absolutely no different from hiring someone based upon whether they have prior work experience.

Need someone to work on a team? Deliver some production-quality CRUD? You could test these directly for every single candidate in an interview. Or you could hire someone with prior web dev experience and a letter from the previous employer or a portfolio that directly and immediately witnesses the requisite knowledge and skills. Everyone does the latter (or uses some other signal to weed out who they interview) because the former is a stupid waste of resources.

Need someone who can model a system using some ODEs (this afternoon, not in 6 weeks after wasting you money taking a MOOC on company time)? Making tweaks to a library for processing large matrices? You could give every single candidate a pop quiz on ODEs or Linear Algebra. Or you could hire someone with a degree and high grades in those courses that directly and immediately witnesses for requisite knowledge.

Another way of saying this: Degrees are direct witnesses of relevant skills, not merely signals or correlated values.

Of course there are other direct witnesses. But there is never anything remotely morally questionable about taking into account the presence or absence of any direct witness of capability during hiring. Including degrees.
Thank you. I was wondering about it.
Good point. If you read the Harper's article [0] about the Joan Ginther, the "luckiest woman on earth" mentioned in this thread's top comment, she seems to have gamed the system basically by having an inside man or two (while also being good at math).

[0] http://harpers.org/archive/2011/08/the-luckiest-woman-on-ear...
Same, I'm still on Mavericks, and Yosemite still feels like "bleeding edge" to me.