skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for the comparison. Regarding Lambda maximum concurrency, I am currently configured for a limit of 20,000 concurrent invokes so perhaps your figure of 100 is not the maximum but simply the default maximum?
Tesla’s Model 3 will boast a 250-mile or greater range, cost $35,000
Xhyve, a lightweight OS X virtualization solution
> Words cannot hold guns, knives, or other weapons. Yes, they can be unpleasant. Yes, they can be upsetting. Yes, people who have been abused can be triggered.

Words can't act, but they can compel, coerce, and intimidate. It absolutely _is_ a safety issue. You can argue over the applicability to this particular situation, but to imply that words are harmless is a disservice to rights guaranteed us under the first amendment.
"Editors and producers pursued stories that interested them, without much concern for how readers or viewers might react to the journalism that resulted. Members of this tribe of journalists shared a sense of what “the news” was. The most influential of them were the editors and reporters on the best newspapers, whose decisions were systematically embraced and echoed by other editors and writers, as well as by the producers of television news. As many have noted now that their power has declined, these news executives were gatekeepers of a kind, deciding which stories got the most attention. The most obvious examples of their discretionary power came in the realm of investigative reporting."

Should I really bemoan the loss of a system in which a handful of individuals picked the news which was deemed worthy of publication or air-time?
> Did your eyes never get attracted by a Taboola 'Read more story here' or a buzzfeed '10 most productive trick for programers' link when you was reading some news?

It sounds like you just need an ad blocking extension perhaps?
I highly recommend Gellner's Nations and Nationalism on this topic. While not Gospel, it might at least be a good start.
U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?
Art-as-trolling is a cherished tradition among social activist artists of the world. The only difference here is that the "Intent is not magic" crowd didn't like it this time.
> However, it is pretty clear the intent of the academic in question was to promote discussion and debate about racism.

There are a lot of people promoting discussion and debate about racism without invoking Klan imagery. There are a lot of people promoting discussion and debate about racism while being respectful and attentive to the concerns of historic targets of racism in their community. If this particular academic could not figure out how do so, it's nobody's responsibility to continue hiring an incompetent teacher (excuse me, "social-political artist"). Hire someone who can do it better. There are thousands of them.
The question you have to ask yourself is, what would be necessary to eliminate that potential for consequences?

Unfortunately for your argument, the answer is inevitably a hypocritical restriction of speech. You cannot wish for both free speech and immunity from consequences, since all that is required for those consequences to take place is more speech.
He's saying that a decreased iodine intake due to eating organic foods causes mild depression.
But wait... didn't the "What Is Code?" thing say that Java is just for white-collar IT workers? If you've got Node.js, why would you ever need Java?

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
I have a hard time believing that all of these combined will make up for the difference in pay compared to an equivalent private sector job in New York, SV, Seattle or even Austin.
When I created a custom link, I got a 404. App-generated links worked fine, though.
Godly Dreams
I upload a video every Tuesday
By 2 pm Please don't miss these powerful messages God has place in my heart to share
https://youtu.be/LqGjC0B9MbE
"I don't think this author understands the constitution. This may apply on public campuses."

Its not "may". It most certainly does apply on public campuses. I point you to https://www.thefire.org for a fuller explanation.
Indeed, there is great power in words. That is both why the First Amendment exists and why some seek to curtail speech they find discomfiting.
These things have always been socially negotiated, though. We have a new social playing field and we aren't fully sure how it works; that is a much more useful focus for this issue than free speech is.
Thanks, I think your perspective on the different use cases for Linux vs *BSD were helpful and something I hadn't seen all in one place before.
The 40 foot figure assumes that the direction of movement is unknown and that one pylon remains fixed. I suppose you could just have each pylon capable of handling 20 feet of three dimensional movement but I doubt the economics work out in favor of that option rather than choosing towers rationally.

That said, your answer is an appeal to authority. Just because a feasibility study says it is feasible does not actually make it feasible. I skimmed the document you linked and nothing in it pertains to large ground movements that would occur due to fault offset - it is all with relation to ground shaking rather than fault slip. Further, it is common knowledge, in fact, that underground structures generally perform better under ground shaking as compared to above ground structures except when the structure crosses the fault which experiences the offset. That is, tunnels work better than pylons except at the point where the large offset occurs.

I understand that you may not be an engineer. I am an engineer, with my area of expertise being in geo-structural interaction, and I am telling you that your statement about a tunnel not being feasible because of earthquakes is NOT correct. There are plenty of other reasons why a tunnel makes no sense for this job, but seismic vulnerability is not a good one. Whether his design is feasible or not is a moot point.
Their spectrum license requires that they not create radio interference for geosynchronous satellites.

How they plan to accomplish that is not clear to me.
There's a long treatment of this in Simon's 2008 talk, "The Audacity of Despair". I'd written at length on that earlier:

http://davidsimon.com/portfolio-item/the-audacity-of-despair

https://plus.google.com/u/0/104092656004159577193/posts/CexR...

Simon says:

In this culture, if you want to find out where the dirt is done, parse some statistics. I learned as a reporter to start despising statistics, and to regard anything that was ever cited to me in advance of an argument as dubious just because somebody was pulling it out and using it.

As I got better as a reporter, I realized that as soon as any of our institutions create a means of measuring themselves in terms of quality, someone is running behind them in that institution to figure out a way of destroying that statistic as a meaningful measure of anything.

In education it's No Child Left Behind and standardized test scores. In the police department, it's crime statistics and clearance rates. In the journalism it's Pulizer Prizes.

These stats don't have to do with anything once the people looking to advance themselves and their agenda, and to protect their institution, get done with them.

...

It's not corruption in the sense of somebody thinking "I am here to make Baltimore worse", or "make the retaining walls in New Orleans collapse yet again". It's somebody thinking "I don't want it landing on me, I want my day to be easier than yours, and I want you to think well of me until I get out of this job".

...

You know how you unfound a robbery report? A guy comes in to report a robbery in a place like south-west Baltimore, you say, "are you sure the guy had bullets in the gun? Are you sure? Are you sure it wasn't just a larceny, are you sure he didn't just take your wallet from you? Oh, you're really insisting, he did have a gun, you saw the bullets, it was a real gun? Hold on, we've got to run a warrant check on you. We gotta see if there's any paper on you. You don't have any paper on you? Oh, by the way, door's over there."

Robberies in the south-west district of Baltimore went down 70% in just one year.

When time came to reduce the murder rate, the same trick didn't work -- you can't hide the bodies, and it's the state Health Department which defines murders.

It's a really powerful piece.
The IronWorker doesn't seem to fulfill the same promise of simplicity that Lambda does. It's talking about scheduling and creating docker instances where Lambda says "just give us your code".
I'm sorry, I may have missed your point about freedom to associate. What was it?
It's not appropriate to use the word "confiscate" in this context. If you're not satisfied with the social contract of this country, you're free to leave and earn money elsewhere.
An easy to use Bookmarks manager for Google chrome
I learned a dozen new things in the first 100 lines or so, that will save me hours, and I've been living in bash for 20 years.

Thanks for this!
When reading The Economist, it is easy to forget that it is an English publication. It tends not to fit easily into familiar American stereotypes.
There are 1st amendment rights in private spaces that function as public spaces. It's not cut and dried.
It seems totally appropriate the artwork was taken down. It was an attempt to provoke, and then co-opt the result of that provocation through somewhat surreptitious filming to produce another work of art, all hosted in a public place which could not be expected to be an art venue, using emotionally charged imagery of a scale that could not be avoided. I generally appreciate art that is provocative and performance art, but at least a performance artist confronts the reaction to the work through their presence. If an artist wants to do something that emotionally charged, I think they need more skin in the game than this guy had.

All the article claims happened, as far as I see, is that the art was taken down, and the school apologized they didn't take it down earlier. The language the school used in its apology seems a little hyperbolic, but whatever. Assuming this is the sum reaction against the artist (and maybe there are more repercussions), then I think that's all a reasonable risk that an artist takes and the artist should take his punches and move on.

Creative defacement of the art would have been a more interesting in-kind response, but I suppose that ship has sailed.
The invocation of the Bill of Rights here is to provide an example of a document attempting to moralize. The author's intent here is that this highly respected moral document protects free speech (the Bill of Rights being what the writers thought to be a non-exclusive set of human rights codified in a legal document), and so we should think twice before doing otherwise.

I am aware of the popular notion that legality and morality are completely separate conversations, but morality does actually inform legality, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. The Bill of Rights is one of those rare legal documents that's seen as a valuable reflection of morality, even today.

Agree with it or not, the author isn't attempting to form a legal argument here, so pointing out the lack of a legal standing for the Bill of Rights at Northwestern is kind of missing the point, I think.
Google "mozilla Eich" for a case study that hits close to home for many HN readers.
They've never liked it. Now they're being listened to.

(I look forward to finding out over the next decade how many plain facts I can quote that I will then hear repeated back to me as a label for "that crowd.")
Appreciate your conciliatory language.
I believe the article is really all about Voltaire's maxim : I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

Such an argument pretty much necessitates an unpleasant exemplar.

Read the obituary of Bob Randall currently on their front page for one instance of the Economist decrying institutional racism in a thoroughly heartfelt manner.
It's not like black people have been lynched well within living memory or continue to be blatantly murdered by pigs and other thugs with no consequences [1:5].

Oh wait...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_(politician)#Civil_...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lynching_in_the_United_State...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trayvon_Martin

[4] http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/23/us/cleveland-police-verdict/

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice
Please remember folks in a time far away US both private and public Colleges got around the US Constitution by shutting down for the summer to put an end to protests during the Vietnam War.
> Apple comes out with an Ad Blocker for Safari.

No, they didn't. They came out with an extension API for Safari that allows extensions which block ads, amongst other things.
> Is it fair?

Absolutely. You can't dictate to the owner of private property how much it should sell or rent for. (Unless maybe your surname is Lenin or Zedong.)

What's next? Why not have the government step in if someone dares ask $300 on Craiglist for a bicycle that's only worth $50 and make him or her sell it for $30? If someone forks up $300 let that be. If nobody buys it, let the message slowly dawn upon the seller.

> desirable areas of certain cities end up effectively "off limits" to lower income renters.

Speaking of desirable: It is an undeniable fact, also that a lack of lower income renters is part of what makes those areas desirable. It's not just the views, quality of the suites or city convenience. It's also the fact that poor people aren't there. Same as country clubs, private schools, and all that.
Oh, I know some who love it... when it carries their message. Situational ethics, basically.
My friend has been a Presidential Innovation Fellow for the last year.

Basically people can't get things done because they are being stonewalled by the old-guard in the various departments they've been tasked with reforming. There are outside vendors with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of contracts on the line, and they don't want those contracts to be cancelled by implementing commonsense new technology reforms.

My friend described a process in one government department where digital documents were received, were printed, were then physically mailed to a back office site, and then manually entered into a system by typing. The contract for the scanning was worth millions. The contract for the back-end was worth millions. People's jobs depended on there being this whole useless exercise. Nothing could be reformed.

I think its important that we have optimism, but nothing short of sledgehammer and mass layoffs of government employees and contractors is going to improve government.
I never noticed there was a new one. I'm seeing the screenshots in the linked article, but my chrome has never worked like that.
Briefly reminded me of Vivaldi, a browser built in NodeWebKit (or Atom?) with a React-based UI.

https://vivaldi.com/
This was one of the points drilled into our head the last time I did a new job orientation (15 years ago): Your computer is warranted by Dell, they will usually send parts directly to you, sometimes they will send a tech out and it's your responsibility to watch him, if you have to send it to the depot remove the disk.

I am surprised that the OP did depot service for keyboard and trackpad. I replaced my own keyboard twice and trackpad once (trackpad was actually part of the housing.) Maybe my enterprise had a special agreement with Dell to let us do this?
Yes, that's Piwik Pro. Apparently "Pro" nowadays means a downgrade, or "for simpletons".
> Basically none, you agreed to this as part of the repair process, like what sansavarous said.

No he didn't. This is akin to taking your car for an oil change, and finding that the seats were replaced as well. He didn't even come close to agreeing to this.

Dell modified his machine, and deleted his data, when there was no reason to do so (why would you need to wipe a disk to replace a keyboard)?

IMHO, depending on the damage, he should go after Dell, and ask to get back some compensation for the damage that was done mostly due to, well, negligence?
I (seriously) get triggered when i read arguments like yours. I was just about to come back with insulting retorts and my heart rate went up. Is that not enough to classify your argument as a "trigger", or is it that only certain political views get the privilege to be "triggering"? If we are going to classify all arguing as triggering , then we 'd better all shut up.
I interpreted him to mean physical collision risk.

As for interference:
They're planning on beaming signal to a wide swath of every plane for full-Earth coverage, not just at a narrow stretch near nadir. That means you'll have users acquiring a fix from a wide swath of sky; Let's say 45 degrees from zenith in various directions. That would make every user below 45 degrees latitude encounter fixes with OneWeb proximate to the geosynchronous belt on a regular basis.

If spectral separation alone was insufficient to prevent interference, it's not something that would affect communications when a satellite is near the equator at all, it's something that would affect all the satellites nearly all the time. A 1200km orbit is 30x closer to Earth than the geosynchronous belt.
How legal are these terms? Dell is forced, by law, to offer certain warranties when a user pays for a product.

Is adding extra conditions like "you may lose data if you use your warranty" legal in the US (assuming op is from USA)?
Brain Fitness Games Are Bogus
It's not speech but coercion that forces people to lose their jobs. Threats of boycotts and premanent brand destruction involve speech but it's an overly broad definition if you classify political action as speech.
There's no reason to learn vi if you know Emacs. If you claim that Emacs isn't installed everywhere, guess what: Neither is vi.

If you want an "installed everywhere" editor, learn ed. If you're willing to take an editor with you (or otherwise make sure a specific editor is everywhere you are), there's no reason it has to be vi.
Does it have extensions for safari and firefox on osx at least? Yes I use all three browsers on osx, and linux too sans safari obviously. If there is a safari extension too so my iphone can form fill too that would be good. Otherwise I'll stick to my normal new passphrase every 6 months and new passwords for each site every year approach. Tonight I'll be doing the yearly update of passwords, which is a pita but not too bad with lastpass as long as I have a show to watch.
Lastpass is a huge target, and while I believe they generally take reasonable security measures, for many the risk of compromise may be greater than an encrypted stand-alone password database.

Couldn't you frame that same basic belief around any large 'nearly-monolithic' web service, like Google, Apple, or Facebook?

I agree, passwords are a risky business (you're storing security tokens for other people for chrisakes), but the power that access to someones Facebook or Google account is pretty equivalent - people run their worlds on those services.

By the way, I happen to agree with your stance. We rely on singular entities far too much on the net.
> To disable slow i18n routines and use traditional byte-based sort order, use export LC_ALL=C (in fact, consider putting this in your ~/.bashrc).

Do not. Having a non-utf8 locale means you won't be able to handle utf-8 sanely ("that's why it's faster") and it will break at the most inexplicable times. Any non-latin1 character appearing in your prompt or command line with this will mess its spacing up for example. Do not do not do not.

Hell I even check for it in my .zshrc: https://github.com/jleclanche/dotfiles/blob/master/.zshrc#L3...

Good post otherwise.
No, Apple shouldn’t kill off the Mac
BTW, actually Voltaire never said that thing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Beatrice_Hall
> Indeed, there is great power in words. That is both why the First Amendment exists and why some seek to curtail speech they find discomfiting.

But their power is also why the first amendment only applies to the government not being able to persecute you. Why should people have the right to speech without consequence of any sort?
You could do what I do: keep an online-charges-only debit account that contains just enough cash to cover recurring services and gets on-demand cash deposits to cover one-off charges.
I read Kindly Inquisitors by Jonathan Rauch[0] earlier this year which makes a fantastic argument against the limitation of free speech. It was written over twenty years ago. While I wholeheartedly agree with Rauch's position, I can't help but wonder what has changed in the last two decades. The points he made then seem just as relevant today, and the examples he provided of speech being censored do not seem at all old-fashioned. Is this sort of behavior strictly limited to university campuses, or does it eventually seep into the "real world" as well?

Is freedom of speech today significantly more hindered than it was twenty years ago?

[0] I read the book after seeing a recommendation on Hacker News. I enjoyed it a great deal and would strongly recommend it also. http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/K/bo1814074...
Password site ​LastPass warns of data breach
I've heard (second hand) that VMWare has a good parallel track.

That said, it makes sense for a company in which individual contributions can revolutionize the business.

There are cases where being an individual contributor is only so valuable (though that "so valuable" number may be very high.) There comes a point where there is only so much impact you can have on your own, which is why _great_ managers absolutely deserve higher compensation.

It's hard to individually make a larger contribution than a manager making every one of their 5 teammates 10% better.

So to answer your question, I believe it plateaus. Where it plateaus is relative to how much individuals can impact the course of the business.
Great talk. Both parts were interesting: tool building and the application of designing molecules.
Our nation's Constitution grants us legal protections for free speech. It does not grant us any social protections for what we might say.

You're looking to conflate the two, and gain social protections from legal authorities, not social authorities.

> Should you lose your job and have to go into hiding and start a new life because you make a joke in poor taste to your 50 twitter followers?

Yes, if your joke or photo was in such poor taste that it caused all of these other people to exercise their right to freely not associate with you.

> Should you lose your job and get death threats because you take a disrespectful photo at a grave site and share it with 5 friends on facebook?

Again, the First Amendment grants freedom of association. The death threats aren't protected speech, and you can prosecute those who are threatening you. So you can engage legal protection for some of that, but not all.
Colorado Supreme Court Rules Employees Can Be Fired for Medical Marijuana Use
Freedom of hate speech isn't in the bill of rights.
Not that it's a cure-all, but one probably shouldn't be using a centralized password store without some sort of multifactor authentication enabled.