skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Take a look at the Beat Generation books. For these folks it was not just possible, but normal, to travel across the US and find a job in every town they stopped.
> Afri-Cola: "Liebt einander und werdet durstig" / "Love each other and get thirsty" (1999)

This is a correct but too innocent translation. "Liebt einander" can both be translated to love each other and also to make love. The latter leads to:

Make love and get thirsty.

I am sure the ambiguity was intended.
Financial benefit is not all that easy to prove. Put another way, it's easy to make it ambiguous as to whether the use of the biometric information was responsible for the financial benefit. Think parallel construction.
Infinite Jest - David Foster Wallace
The Making of the Atomic Bomb - Richard Rhodes
Foucault's Pendulum - Umberto Eco
> If interest rates are at 7% (savings account returns you 7% annually) who will invest in risky start-ups?

Well, they're not. Interest rates are so extremely low right now that they don't even keep up with inflation. In several banks and several countries, the interest rate is actually less than zero. Or, in other words, banks charge you to store your money for you.

Given that, is investing in technology really that bad of an idea? You have to put your money somewhere.

VCs are mostly funded by large stashes of money - some of it among the oldest and most secure money in the world - called limited partners (LPs). Think endowment funds, that type of thing. Those funds will diversify their investments across multiple aspects of the economy. For simplicity sake, we'll say 50% real estate, 40% stock/bonds, and 10% into VC funds. VCs take a small chunk, and invest the rest in tech companies.

In that way, some of the most institutionalized money in the world will, yes, be invested in Uber. Really.
I think errors like this are usually a muscle-mind error, not a misunderstanding error. I very frequently type "you're" when what I said in my head was "your". Sometimes I send/post before I notice the mistake.
Is that really that big of a deal, though? There would be effectively zero benefit to giving the students their new grades on demand instead of after a batch process. It's not a reason to upgrade the system, it just shows that the system was made when batch jobs were considered acceptable.
The least intuitive 404 page possible
Although almost everyone is better off in material terms than they were two generations ago, I fear that the level of wealth required to live a "comfortable" life may have outpaced that increase. How many hours does a blue collar worker have to put in to live close to a grocery store and good schools? How much time do the working poor spend commuting? If you break your arm, what percentage of your income will be consumed by medical costs?

I don't have any data on this, but it's my hunch about why there's so much economic resentment these days.
Yes I reading this too. Very interesting. Earlier in the doc, he says:

"...our ability to pull bits out of random places of the Internet, bring them back to the mother-base to evaluate and build intelligence off of is just plain awesome!

(S/SI//REL) One of the coolest things about it is how much data we have at our fingertips. If we only collected the data we knew we wanted...yeah, we'd fill some of our requirements, but this is a whole world of possibilities we'd be missing! It would be like going on a road-trip, but wearing a blindfold the entire time, and only removing it when you're at one of your destinations...yeah, you'll still see stuff, but you'll be missing out on the entire journey!"

They really do have a different view of privacy. Only being giving what you're specifically seeking is like going on a trip with a blindfold on! Well, yes, yes it is!
​Logjam OpenSSL security hole patched
If the interest rate is at 7 percent, then inflation will probably be between 5 and 10 percent.

There would be other opportunities in an economy that will yield more than 7 percent, if the bank is offering 7 percent. Additionally, the inflation rate would be higher, so not investing your money, is losing it to inflation.
Unfortunately I am hearing a lot of people say the same - the fact that people ARE talking about a bubble and hence it is NOT a bubble.
This justification is calming to hear - but could this be the cause of complacency this time around?
I'd be interested in calculating just a subset of roads and comparing to the overall average. Dual carriageways are the most likely to adapt the terrain to the road rather than building the road to the terrain. If I recall correctly, Germany has the strictest requirements for the straightness, and the States has a rule that every X miles must have a section that can be converted to an impromptu landing strip. The website is completely crushed right now, but once it's back I may play with the data.
Darpa robotics challenge
I tend to be very cynical these days. Far too many things are not designed for longevity. But, I can certainly see where a newer HVAC system would be more efficient.
> Sure, he says, Uber is a great business and a great company. But $41 billion? Now? Maybe in a few years time.

If that's the best evidence you can come up with, it's not a bubble, it's an overvalued market at best. Uber's valuation collapsing even to, say, 15B, is not a bubble popping in any meaningful sense, and nobody can deny that there's a business there.

In 2000, that we according to this mysterious CEO can't remember, companies with barely any customers, next to no revenue, massive deficits and not even a coherent business plan achieved billion-dollar valuations.
> Is this some ridiculous attempt to Americanize London by trying to rename parts of it after bits of New York and San Francisco?

AFAICT, SF doesn't have any role at all in the source of names, but otherwise, yes [0]. Of course, lots of the place name in the continental US (and a number of other places) are a result of the same kind of thing in reverse centering around renaming every piece of the continent after parts of Britain, and particularly England, so turn about is fair play.

[0] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-11305340
A substantial number of people object the GM foods on the grounds that it will inevitably limit their freedom of choice. Americans are supposedly in favour of freedom of choice but it seems that such freedoms can only be exercised by large corporations.
What Broke the Magic Online Economy?
Doesn't seem high to me. I recall that my school district replaced the HVAC system while I was in high school and the ROI paid for the new multimillion dollar system in something like 5 years.

http://www.schoolenergysaving.com/schoolEnergyFacts.php

"A mid-sized school district with 800,000 square feet of space pays more than $1M annually for energy."

"Space heating, cooling, and lighting together account for nearly 70% of school total energy use."
Seems pretty standard. Economists are usually very good at predicting 11 out of 4 recessions/bubbles ending/whatever.
It is a hipster thing, but it's also genuinely enjoyable. Although recently I've come to prefer the even-more-hipster Club Mate alternatives, like Buenos Mate or Mio Mio.

I don't quite understand why people always bring up genuine mate tea in these discussions on HN. As you say, it's a completely different thing. Club Mate is what you drink instead of cola for an alternative flavor and more caffeine.
Keep the slider and faces, it's the best part of the UI. If it was one of those lame pick a number things, I wouldn't have done it.
Other than what I've read here I don't really know who Jack Dorsey is.

My point was based on the grandparent's own words: "You don't have to be Elon Musk to be a 'product visionary'. It's simply someone who's good at envisioning new products" which sounds to me like an abasement of the English language.

This reminds me of another battle I have apparently lost. Companies that have a "vision".

No you probably don't. You might have a plan, a goal or an ethos but with the exception of a small handful of companies- if you claim your's has a 'vision' then you're deluded or incurably pretentious.

I could just about live with 'mission' as at least that doesn't sound like you're claiming divine providence.

(If it's not immediately obvious that I'm British, bear our famed dislike of overstatement in mind. However plenty of UK companies seem to spout this nonsense: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3A.co.uk+"our+vision" )
That's certainly a possibility. I wanted to give the admins the benefit of the doubt. Even in such a best case scenario they come across as grossly incompetent. In your case scenario they come across as corrupt.
> No matter what human action you consider, if everyone does it to everyone
doing it to them, then everyone has it done to them by everyone to whom
they do it

I'm finding this incredibly hard to parse, yet feel like the point should be quite simple, and the paper seems to get harder from there.

> if every given proposition bears it to every proposition bearing it to the given proposition, then every given proposition is borne it by every proposition the given proposition bears it to.

I don't want to knock someone's efforts at this, but perhaps this is only a "plain english explanation" to someone who already understands the topic at hand?

In all, it reminds me of "the missile knows where it is": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZe5J8SVCYQ
H-1B Visa Violations: US Opens Probe into Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services
>>- Can you come up with a better process that scales with the number of interviewers in your company, but also maintains reasonable consistency and keeps reasonable costs?

The last time I was looking for a job, a company gave me a small project and asked me to come back once I had finished it(or don't bother coming back). Around a week's worth time was given. The next rounds were spent around code review and discussing other ways in which the project could be completed. They basically tested my ability to get work done, and how good I was in it.

>>Maybe you think you can, but keep in mind that the tech giants have data-crunched their interview stats over and over and this process is what they stuck with.

May be you think they have it all figured out, but they routinely have to spend billions to acquire companies in order to grow. If really hired good people, they could have achieved it all in house.

>>- In places where they look for A* engineers, the point of the interview is often not to test what you know best

A* engineers ace in making things happen, not in being scholars of trivia.

>>but how you get along with problems you have never seen before.

You use your knowledge to systematically work for hours and sometimes days. Algorithms are a science that developed over decades, if some one claims they can do that over a whiteboard in an hour, they should go claim their fields medal.

>> An algorithm or data structure question often fits the bill.

What possible analytical skills can you test by knowing how well the candidate has memorized the answer to a math problem.

>>- Geeks love geeky puzzles (like inverting binary trees).

Geeks love getting stuff done, doing new things and building stuff. Not spending months memorizing math theorems.

>>Also, IMHO, knowing only one language is a red flag for me too at 10+ years experience level.

Let me guess, are you talking about people like Linus Torvalds and Theo de Raadt?
Who cares if we're in a bubble or not? A sound business strategy is sound regardless.
Le .CLUB du jeux – JDN
Actually, the "free market" is an illusion that never works in reality, as much as communism is an utopia.

Given actually complete freedom, companies would cartelize to monopolies and suppress any competition or innovation, so they would have a status quo, could dictate the prices, buy the political system to prevent any change that could harm them and finally squeeze as much profit as possible out of everyone so that the rich people can get even richer while the poor ones (99%) suffer without any chance tho change something. Free market stories are used to have a carrot on a stick in front of people so they don't complain too much, and "influenced" mass media surpasses the free will of most people.

Our "misguided whims of bureaucrats" seem to regulate too much, but the reality is that there is just way too much bullshit out there. Regulation leads to standardization and everyone benefits after a short period of moaning.
Ok, but 'we' are gods compared to them. We've build a better society together. You can take some pride in your part in that!
Quite curious about if whether we had more robust shell languages, like Inferno's es, which uses functional expressions, though it's some 20+ years old by now, if kept alive by some enthusiasts... would much of the rationale behind the more basic configuration management and provisioning go away?

The chief rationale for embarking on the CM route is idempotence. Though it seems to me having a basic, lexer-only language simply for chain loading commands to exec() without much of the state and environment baggage behind full command shells could work as an alternative. execline works like this: http://skarnet.org/software/execline/
For those confused by 25 year old Scala: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scala_(company).
The Company: Can we talk about it?
... and you wind up with those more predisposed to being altruistic, upon education and encouragement, also foregoing reproduction. The result may be a short term surge in altruistic behavior, but a stronger selection away from altruism at the genetic level.
You watched too much fox news I'd say.
Pre-made box filled with fabricated votes: let every volunteer (typically at least one by every party, plus a couple independents) check that boxes are empty and in order, and that nobody stuffs them over the day.

Turn off / pause recording: no idea what you even mean, there's physical presence of opposite parties throughout the entire process.

Bribe inspection-related personnel: again, volunteer driven with volunteers from all parties plus independents - it will be hard to bribe your direct competitors (and enough of them).

The higher levels where numbers are tabulated publicize all numbers (in and out), so anything that's off can be verified locally in a distributed way.

The idea is that everything happens under public scrutiny. I don't see how that could work with fun algorithms and probabilities that only some experts can understand.

The main problem is that seemingly opposing forces collude secretly, but there won't be a fix for that in the voting mechanism.
So what? How do you know that's the code actually running on their servers?
I'm still not entirely sure what that means. Does it mean you recursively swap left and right branches, or does it mean you create a new data structure where the bottom elements become the top elements?
I don't think it's a reasonable view. Leaving aside the question of whether we're in a bubble or not, if a bubble existed and burst it would have a major impact at least on the bay area economy as a whole.

1) What makes you think there is room at AppGoogBook for those unemployed startup engineers? If the bubble bursts, it'll be because of a reality-check in the growth potential for consumer technology and advertising. AppGoogBook are chasing a lot of those same areas.

2) A lot of service industries in the bay area are being propped up by the software industry. All those new restaurants popping up in SF--how much of their revenues comes from VCs and software engineers whose salaries are paid by VCs?

3) Real estate values and rents in the bay area will plummet of there is a readjustment in the technology sector.
Well, a while back, Reddit picked up a bunch of users that used to be on Digg.com. Maybe it's just time to let certain users go.

It think it's a bit humorous these people complaining about their "free speech rights being curtailed" when what they have to say follows some specific subjects. How come the free speech activists haven't created /r/HowISISShouldCreateItsFirstAtomBomb ?

I think the real issue here isn't censorship, it's legitimacy. These free speech types want the legitimacy that Reddit has. And Reddit is not allowing that to happen on their site. But the world isn't coming to an end, people can type another address in their browser and go to whatever little place they want to.

And perhaps if the free speechers are concerned that their legitimate arguments are falling on deaf ears, perhaps they should re-examine the legitimacy of their hate speech. Reddit doesn't have a responsibility to share their legitimacy with hate speech. The managers of Reddit have been trying to build brand equity, why should they sacrifice their efforts to appease people who spend their free time explaining how awful they are?

Yeah, go to Voat. Or wherever you're welcome. Or make your own web site. But you can't freeload on the legitimacy that Reddit's brand name provides. If you're going to make a site about hating fat people, then you're responsible for making it wildly popular.

Good luck.
You cannot "admit" a prediction of the future as if the prediction of the future were a fact. It can only be predicted.
2009: OK you're right, this is a bubble http://blog.jedchristiansen.com/pmarcaarchive/ok-youre-right...
Well, I'm glad that Londoners have collectively decided to tell the rebranders where to stick it. I've lived in London for ten years and have never heard someone refer to "Midtown" or "Noho". Urgh.
Reclaim Your Inbox and Subscribe to Email Newsletters with Evernote
If you can't find a job with a CS degree right now, don't blame the industry.
How many American companies make flatscreens? I bet if you read the article you'll find that it's not an American company.
How can we see if this technique works? There are two methods try to know something: deduction and induction.

First a little deduction. Let's try to be explicit about the theory behind this technique.

It's safe to assume that the job will NOT consist mainly of cranking out binary tree inversions on whiteboards while being watched over. So obviously we're hoping to make a correlation with something else. Assuming the candidate was not tipped off and learned this particular puzzle, perhaps we are correlating to an ability to rapidly create novel solutions of long-solved algorithms without reference tools.

But is that what the new hire will be doing? Probably not.

We could continue down this path, identifying ever more removed correlations until we get to something that the job actually demands. This probably involves solving hard problems like naming things. [1] But by now our theory stands on pretty thin ice indeed.

In any case, all of this deduction is theory making. It's not knowledge until we attempt to falsify [2] it via induction. The human mind constantly induces hoping to verify our deductions. We reason, observe, conclude and repeat. We're good enough at it to survive, but that's about it. Lucky for us, science came along. Today's technical hiring is at best alchemy.

A interesting company called TripleByte [3] is trying to apply induction (first for YC companies). They specially shun on white board coding and puzzle solving tests in general. I will be interested to see how they fare and whether their learnings are adopted more broadly.

[1] http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TwoHardThings.html

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsification

[3] http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/07/triplebyte/
> States has a rule that every X miles must have a section that can be converted to an impromptu landing strip

This is not true.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/00mayjun/on...

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/airstrip.asp
Here is some of why the OP is correct:

From 50,000 feet up, we take in data,
maybe already have some other data,
manipulate all that data, and get results
we want to be powerful, valuable, etc.

This little process is more important
now because computers let us do much
more in the data manipulations.

That said, there is a remaining question:
What manipulations should we have the
computers do?

Shockingly often in the past,
we understood the manipulations well
enough to program them because
we were largely just programming
what we had done or in principle
knew how to do just manually.

But, as we have programmed more of
what we knew how to do manually,
we will want more powerful, valuable
manipulations.

Well, often the best approach to
more powerful, valuable manipulations
will be via mathematics. There,
we can look at reality, see some
situations or properties that
appear to hold, let those be
assumptions for some mathematics,
that is, hypotheses for
some theorems,
proceed with theorems and proofs,
get some mathematical
results, and use those to
say what manipulations to do.

E.g.: (1) Statistical hypothesis
tests. (2) Systems of ordinary
differential equations as
growth models. E.g., what would
happen if we released 1000 healthy
US bobcats into the outback of
Australia? (3) For real time
local delivery, which vehicle
takes the next order that
comes in so that we can
meet promises to customers
and minimize expected delivery
cost? (4) Pick a part of the ocean,
drill a lot of oil wells; now,
what should the sea floor oil pipeline
network look like to carry the oil
to where we want it meeting safety
standards and minimizing cost, e.g.,
expected net present value over the
life of the oil wells? There are many
more such.

For such problems, data manipulations
from theorems and proofs, sometimes
new, can knock the socks off
any other approach, e.g., intuitive
heuristics.

That's some of the future of
math, especially in what gets programmed.
I think this is unreasonable simply because industrial accidents do happen and they aren't 100% preventable, much like car accidents. There should be [large] amounts of financial compensation [like $2.5 million, or about 10x what she'd have made at $400/month for 50 years] but "most of the gross profits" and "jail time" is ridiculous.

https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html

> 3.3 per 100,000 in the US die

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/osh_12042014.htm

> Over half of the more than 3.0 million private industry injury and illness cases reported in 2013 were of
a more serious nature that involved days away from work, job transfer, or restriction (DART cases).
These cases occurred at a rate of 1.7 cases per 100 full-time workers, a statistically significant decrease
from 2012.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

> Fatalities per 100,000 Licensed Drivers

> 15.84	in 2012, 23.21 in 1994

There are, frankly, far more dangerous for-profit machines that people happily refrain from suggesting those sorts of penalties for.
You need rich people to campaign the proposition.
I’m a designer and I want to help the world. Now what?