skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The people who advocate healthy food will tell you that potatoes and beans were among your worst choices. Ask them. I have a 700 calorie thing of rice and chicken that I love, and I have been repeatedly told it's awful for my diet and I need to eat healthier, completely ignoring the fact that an entire race on the planet has done pretty okay with rice and meats for centuries.

The one thing I know for sure is that almost nobody who discusses this stuff on the Internet, particularly people who throw acronyms like TDEE and BMR around, have any clue what they're talking about and only you can listen to your own body. Weight loss and the Internet is a stupid, stupid place. I saw a thread once where people were sure beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jared from Subway was lying because there's no way such a diet could have ever worked. All he did was eat less. That's it. It's not hard. It worked. Look at him. But no, the Internet knows better.
Student scholarship available for attending GopherConIndia 2016
Is the money the Fed lends out "hard-earned" or is it manufactured as a side-effect of fiscal policy (e.g. quantitative easing)? Does it seem right that public policy should so clearly benefit the wealthy by forcing money into the economy through private allocation experts?

There should be a way for entrepreneurs to tap into that money directly, avoiding the wealthy, gate-keeping middle-men. I resent those people, because the irony is that such people make money as money flows through them, thanks to fees, so even their wealth doesn't necessarily mean they are any good at allocation. Even if you take into account returns, in a growing economy when most bets are good bets. Money should flow through people who know how to make real things, not just make decisions.
As far as I can tell - it also didn't control for "type" of exercise.

Not all exercise is created equal.
Good luck eating 3000kcal of lentils in one day.
>> (Though if you've found a good option, that will allow me to easily sync across my home desktop, laptop, office pc, tablet, and smartphone, without using the cloud, I would absolutely love to hear about it! Maybe something Bluetooth based?)

I'd like to chime in with another suggestion for a storage solution that I haven't seen mentioned yet: syncthing ( https://syncthing.net/ ) makes for a very good alternative to Dropbox, letting you synchronize your data across your devices but without relying on a third party service to do so. I use it to sync my KeepassX database across Linux, Windows and Android devices.

Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated in any way with syncthing, I'm just a happy user.
After years in the practice of obesity medicine, helping people lose excess weight, I'd say the thrust of the article is correct. The main key to successful (that is, sustained) weight loss is modifying food intake. Not for nothing do we call this "lifestyle modification", we should never underestimate the effort and courage it takes to adhere to the better plan.

Thing is one can never exercise enough to "burn off" the tremendous calorie intake most people are subject to. After all around 75-80% of energy expenditure occurs in the resting state, only 20-25% is ordinarily attributable to physical activity.

However I fully agree with the article that exercise is far from useless, certainly can contribute to well-being and has many indirect benefits that assist in long-term maintenance of decreased body fat content.

Of course none of this is really new, it's been established wisdom in obesity treatment circles for a long time. "Getting in shape" is hardly a trivial project as it requires commitment, determination, knowledge and support. Maintaining the benefit of hard won weight loss is not free, the price is eternal vigilance.
You are right, 500kcal is a significant chunk for most people. But eating 500kcal less is not (usually) the same as eating 3000kcal.
Exercise and the lowered depression levels may be a good trigger for lowering the amount of confort food eaten and increasing diet discipline. The lower calorie intake still gets the credit, but many people may never get there without the exercise first.
"is", "new", and "KMSCON" are all erroneous there. (-:
You must be pretty strong, good for you :)
"It's not obvious, actually"

Yes it is. Changes in metabolism are a second-order effect, at most. There is only one first-order effect: fat = calories in - calories out. Once that equation is OK, one can go look at all the other factors - BMR, how macros are split, genetics, ...
I was simplifying of it as:

Calories --> Weight

Food quality & exercise --> health
Of course your opinion is welcome :-D

As a counterpoint, I knew many hobbyists who were not in school for electronics use it to great effect.

Eg, in the Boston artist scene. One girl designed and built a whole bunch of home-brew analog synthesisers. Another guy made a performance art kinetic sculpture that would move and bang on drums and other percussives.

Like I mentioned in my comment, the book by Forrest Mims is a more gentle introduction that can get you started. But if you are hungry for more, AoE is the place to go.
I don't think that testing by Facebook is going to help you unless you are using the exact same model as they are and are assured of using their exact firmware. At work we use SAS SSDs in large quantities and the firmware we use is customized to us (based on the mainline one). Do not assume that a bug that was fixed in our firmware was necessarily fixed in the normal one. One would think it would but it is possible that it wasn't ported to the mainline firmware.
Seems like it would be good to take the file, then dump each line onto a queue, then have lambda run for each thing on that queue. It should parallelize really nicely.
>but I hold that being overweight and exercising

How is being overweight 'far better' for health or well being? (assuming you're talking about excess adipose tissue).

Please define 'function' and how excess adipose increases ones ability to walk, run and climb.
For comments follow link-

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9721212
Software is infinitely duplicable at zero cost. This drives a lot of its economics and society of programmers. It also means you can solve your software problems easily by adding more software.

This is never going to be true of hardware.

Having said that, the "shield" approach is clearly winning among the introductory and hobby market. You can buy loads of them for low cost: http://www.dx.com/p/arduno-37-in-1-sensor-module-kit-black-1...

Productisation is limited by regulatory effects, FCC/CE and so on.
I disagree, completely.

I workout, I do my best to keep my nutrition in order, but I think cut/maintain/bulk are the wrong priorities. It's just the Internet fitness community thing; it's not wrong per se but implies a focus on what is less relevant.

The priority should be your health, and I always saw nutrition and health professionals advocating diversity. Focusing on calorie balance almost always overlooks this.
http://careers.stackoverflow.com/ and linkedin come to mind.
Isn't this (just) dithering noise?

AFAIK, the reason it's so effective in the example is that adding the noise helps the quantization process in the posterization better represent the original color spectrum. Without the dithering the quantization error can keep adding up in a way that the posterization filter cannot control (but which the image author can engineer to be problematic, as surely was the case here). With the dithering you have a statistical guarantee that the quantization errors average out.
Abs particularly because abs don't get very big no matter what you do, and so for most people abs won't really be very visible unless you dip below 10% body fat. No amount of crunches etc. will work around that.

For larger muscle groups the body fat percentage matters much less.
Go vs. Rust: Productivity vs. Performance (2014)
This looks great and polished. I have just one usability problem - with all panes having the same color and no visible border, it is very difficult resize them. Especially bottom panes (find, console) which have some confusing extra space on top.
Make: Electronics is a great introduction and a lot of fun.
http://www.makershed.com/products/make-electronics-book
There is too much mysticism around nutrition and health; people think it's about the method when it's rather about finding a method that works for you the way you apply it.

People seem to find it very hard to reason about dosages as well; so-and-so is "good for you" and so-and-so is "bad for you", again with the mysticism. Nothing is bad for you and everything is bad for you, all depending on the dose. And vice versa, foods that are supposedly good for you don't do shit if you don't dose it appropriately, and become bad for you if you overdose it.
Health Insurance or Non-Insurance alternatives
Octodon: all-fingers keyboard for smartphones and tablets
> but there is an world of difference being

How so (in terms of body composition)? Say TDEE = 3000 and one disregards macro/micros and eats at 2500 for 20 weeks opposed to one who ensures appropriate amounts.
You're stating truisms really. And you trust OTP (quite rightly) - ergo you trust encryption. My personal trust point is properly implemented AES-256 with a slow hashing function.
If the easly replacable component is good, there will be no reason to replace it at all. Components aren't getting replaced willy-nilly.
Yes, of course, but - still - it's "Internet-wisdom". And mostly from fitness communities which may or may not be adequately knowledgeable.

The split thing could make one focus too much on macronutrients, possibly eating the same thing over and over to hit the desired macros, while overlooking micronutrients. Yet, if one followed the simplest nutritional advice (diversity) instead of Internet-wisdom, that would be addressed.
So much this. If you include regular exercise you're way more motivated not to over-eat, you simply don't want to spoil the hard work you did since it's so easy to consume 500 cal but so much harder (relatively) to burn 500 cal. Combining both has certainly been effective for me.
For comments follow link-
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9721212
It would make for an interesting experiment. Eat 3000kcal per day of doughnuts and cakes for a few months. See how much you weigh. Then switch to 3000kcal of organic meat, veg and healthy fats per day. Would your weight change in the same way? I can't say what the answer is. Has anyone tried experimenting with this?
Yup. 3000kcal is my "maintenance" number.
I could eat 4000cals of steamed brocolli and boiled chicken and very quickly become obese.

Quality of food is important, but an excess amount of quality macronutrients or micronutrients will result in excess adipose tissue.

Focus on eating at a deficit, with nutrient dense food.
>the practice of obesity medicine

Curious, what does that entail?
> Still find it hilarious how so many people still don't understand that a caloric deficit or surplus is the #1 thing to do when trying to cut or bulk.

But it is far from the only thing, which I think is the point being made by the post you replied to. If you take in your exact calorific requirement each day bot solely in the form of bacon and chips, you are going to be rather unhealthy. You may even gain weight partly because feeling bad makes you do less activity (so you should be eating less to account for that) and partly because the lack of certain nutrients in the balance (and over abundance of others) causes hormone and digestive changes which change the way your body uses those calories.

As you rightly point out the opposite is true too: more in than out will result in weight gain even if everything coming in is in a healthy balance, but there is more to being healthy than being in the recommended weight band for your height.

FYI: I'm no nutritionist, but I have completely changed my form in the last 18 months (dropping from ~15.5 stone to ~10.25 and now running 5K in the real world in ~24.5 minutes (22m27s is my PB on the treadmill, one of my regular routes in the great outdoors is 8K) from previously not being able to jog to the corner shop without being out of breath for the afternoon). All this change was achieved in a large part by monitoring and controlling my intake against activity, but I'm pretty sure changing diet balance and exercise has helped greatly.

I think people who work purely on calorie counting and ignore other factors are as deluded as those who think they can eat too much simply because what they are eating is in healthy ratios.
>That said, it's fair to say that there's a widespread presumption in western democracies that if a region of a country holds a legitimate vote to split off, they should be allowed to do so.

Somaliland did and is not recognized by anybody.

The actual assumption is that if a region of a country holds a legitimate vote that is recognized as so by the rest of the country, then it should be allowed to do so.

Votes in Quebec, Scotland, South Sudan, Erythrea, Timor Leste were recognized by the main country before they happened.

The only exception is Kosovo where Serbia opposed the vote.
The literature shows that a caloric deficit is what matters the most for weightloss, by an extremely large margin, so large that all other factors can safely be ignored for "normal people".

Nutrient timing is completely irrelevant for normal people who want to lose weight, and only becomes relevant for bodybuilders with extremely low body fat levels, as well as athletes who train or compete multiple times a day, and even for them it is not one of the most important factors.
In which case, just use telnet. Seriously.
To lose weight EATING WELL is the most important thing.

For me it is shocking to watch the calories argument, and almost saying that you have to starve in order to lose weight.

40 years ago Americans, or most Europeans did not starve, and being overweight was rare. They ate lots of fat, for example with consumption of butter(calories) three times what it is today.

Traveling around the world I see people that eat well(I have eaten their food) and nobody is fat there. They cook their food though.

People in the Western world eat very badly. Most of their food is precooked, frozen and stored in plastic. That alone removes lots of necessary components of food, like vitamins or fiber, or degrade it making them not usable by the body.

So when the body needs essential components, and could not get it the normal way, it enters panic mode and craves for more food.

One of the most overweight people I have seen in my life were native Americans Indians in reserves and in Alaska or native people from Hawaii. They are so poor and eat so badly no matter how much they eat their body never says enough. People in Hawaii were known for being slender before colonization.

There are natural limitations on industrial food, and we are paying for it.

Industry instead of solving he problems(which is hard) has tricked be body into believing the food is totally ok, with things like artificial flavoring.
That's an impressive picture, but the 'lumberjacks' that I've seen lately by our cabin in WI are two guys with a giant robot-like machine that grabs onto the tree, cuts all of the branches off, cuts it into separate sections from the top down, and stacks them for the trucks to come and pick them up.

I don't know what their rate of clear-cutting is, but they seem to clear out about a city block size in a week.

Something like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzaXMzYFtSM

except the ones I've seen don't walk.

So I would expect the numbers to get better going forward.
If you burn the same amount of calories in both situations, why would it be different?
<sarcasm>Yeah, I tried cutting trees down all day but then I got fired from my job as a software developer. I suggested that maybe we could turn the wood into paper to print the documentation on, but the documentation is all online, so they wouldn't give me a job. Then I climbed a mountain but there was no wifi up there so I missed my 3PM Skype interview for a new role. On the plus side, now the only job I can get is ditch-digger I am feeling much healthier.</sarcasm>

People living standard western lives don't have a lot of time for exercise, so diet is going to have a much bigger impact on their calorific balance. That's the whole point of TFA.

It would be great if we all had a better life-work balance and could climb more mountains, but that doesn't mean people can apply that advice to their lives right now. They can start doing some fork putdowns and head shakes.
Cooking healthy food can indeed be cheaper than buying junk if you go about it the right way. Buy kale, cabbage, sweet potatoes, carrots etc. in bulk and combine with chicken or meat when on offer. The thing many people miss about healthy food vs cutting calories is that all this green stuff fills your stomach with less calories than a traditional western diet making it easier to cut calories.
The only difficult thing about eating better food is getting into a rhythm and setting aside 30 minutes a day to do it. Plus you obviously need a kitchen.
Stripe in the Nordics
I presume that over time, the price of any piece of content will be competed down to the cost of bandwidth, which I guess is quite a bit cheaper than 10x/GB? So yes, initially, higher prices can be charged, but then as more seeders stick around, there will be price competition.
I have to do some image processing algorithms (noise removal) using Discrete Wavelet Transform (I've implemented Critically Sampled DWT).
To do this, I want to intuitively understand:
what that wavelet function is;
why do we need to write integrals (with exponential in complex power!) - thus, why we have to make generalization CWT (Continuous WT) to effectively implement DWT;
what parameters can I play with to obtain best result.

Now it's black box for me.
> Yes, person A may eat all the burgers and twinkies, because he's going to the gym all the time and swimming laps like there's no tomorrow.

But as you learned just from reading this headline, that counts as "exercising more" and he'd hardly lose weight! I'll take swimming, though, that really is effective calorie burning if you do it for long enough.
Curious: Was it a lot of back-and-forth with support to lift the limits?
Massive discrepancies in how business and IT leaders view and understand data
I have seen plenty of overweight people back in Italy that were able to do tough 10 hrs hikes or caving explorations with heavy loads or else. They looked far more healthy to me than slim people that do no exercise. I am just very skeptic of using weight as a measure of health or even as a universal goal. That said, being very overweight is a problem and being slim and doing exercise is a better option.
Nobody says you need to be hungry to keep a healthy weight, but if you are overweight, and you want to lose that weight, there's no way around being hungry sometimes.

You know why? Your fat cells only start giving off their fat to the blood when your blood sugar level is too low, and when that happens, your brain gets a signal you should eat, thus you're hungry.
Yes, it has been scientifically proven about a bajillion or so times that a caloric deficit causes weightloss, and a caloric surplus causes weight gain, irrespective of the source of calories.

However, eating 3000kcal of "healthy food" is a lot harder than eating the same amount of "junk food", because "junk food" has a higher caloric density -- that is the very thing that makes the food "bad".

A person can easily eat 3000kcal of junk food in a day and still not be satisfied, while a person who eats as much healthy food as they can may still fall shy of 3000kcal.
And this is why it in practice would be different: Different foods makes you feel different, and affects your willingness to be active and your ability to do hard exercise.

If you do control for activity (incredibly hard), then there's no reason why it would be different. If you don't, there are plenty of reasons why it would.
I lost 40lb, and the only exercise I do is walking / running occasionally around my apartment complex.

My trick? I slowly reduced the size of my portions and I limited myself to eating only when I felt hungry.

I didn't do any sort of strict calorie counting, I just tried to have a rough idea of how much food I was eating. Seriously. That's it. If you eat fewer calories, you will lose weight. It's that simple.

At no point did I starve myself or force myself to undergo harsh dietary conditions.

Here's the thing, I think a lot of people fail to lose weight because they try doing too many drastic changes all at once. This is REALLY difficult! But if you just do it really slowly... You don't even notice the change. Sure, the downside is that you won't see super fast changes, it'll take longer to manifest itself. On the other hand, this is probably the easiest possible way to lose weight, because it requires very little effort on your part (you just have to have enough self control to not stuff your face every day).

Just serve yourself a smaller portions than you'd normally consume, eat it, and wait a few minutes. Then if you still felt hungry, go get some more. Otherwise, you've had enough and you're satisfied.

At the beginning of this year I read an article that made me realize something. The article basically said "If you're fat, it means that you're eating like a fat person. You are a fat person." Maybe it seem stupid... But it's correct. If you're fat, it means that you have the eating habits and lifestyle of a fat person. Ask yourself, is that who you really want to be? For me the answer was "no".

You can even cheat with your portions! Every time I go to a ramen shop I disregard all limits and just eat to my heart's content. Although doubtless it won't work very well if you do that every day.
Are you sure? My middle name is Brubeck as well, and there is some overlap in features:

* Brubeck only runs on Linux. It won't even build on Mac OS X.
…
Brubeck has the following dependencies:
* A Turing-complete computing device running a modern version of the Linux kernel
…
The are several ways to interact with a running Brubeck daemon.

Though I guess that jazz guy is more famous.
Regarding the 2500 vs 3000 kcal thing: move around, lift weights, knock uglies with your partner multiple times per day, do whatever floats your boat in order to increase your BMR by 500 kcal per day.
Regarding the "worse off" part: I assume having less strength and endurance is worse for the average Joe compared to having more strength and endurance.
Sorry that it wasn't clear in my post, I guess I assumed it was self-explanatory.
They are able to generate part of the AST visitors boilerplate.

For example, JJTree on JavaCC.
‘How to Raise an Adult’
There exists a group of people for whom ignoring hunger is not an option. I have been interviewing a bunch of nutritionists here in London about this and if they are to be believed this group make up a large percentage of obese people, which kinda makes sense :-)

Hence the advice to eat foods that make you feel full before you reach your desired calorie intake.