skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agreed, there is more reality to the dark web than there was to Satanic Ritual Abuse. Nonetheless, the panic:reality ratio is probably something like 99:1, vs. 100:0 for SRA. In both cases (as with any moral panic), it can be terribly dangerous when these kind of panics start to drive policy and policing.
I don't have an answer for specific 'toxins', as the way I worded things is based on experience.

All I do know is that fasting has tremendous benefits to our bodies, which is based on science (most papers speak of 12 hours to three days; rarely longer). As for the granular details (answering the 'how' and 'why' questions), I'm not certain science has a definitive answer for that. My perspective is that, subjective.

Also, the tone of your comments are a bit harsh. If it's a simple question, well, cite the scientific papers that establish your point of view. Contraction point of views aren't constructive, what's your more scientifically established idea, as it relates to the benefits (or lack thereof) of fasting?
"V.D.L. and T.E.M. have equity interest in L-Nutra, a company that develops
medical food. 100% of the L-Nutra equity belonging to V.D.L. will be donated
to non-profit organizations. Neither author had any role in data analysis."

from the paper.

VDL is the PI though.
Got 18 on my first try. I have trouble distinguishing red and orange, and I was unaware of it until high school. We were talking about Steve Jobs wearing the same clothes every day as a sort of uniform and I made a comment comparing that to Gilligan always wearing his signature orange shirt. At that point the whole class corrected me and said that his shirt is actually red. I still see it as orange (roughly the same as the YC logo), but I make the mental correction and call it red.

The next time it came up was when I needed a bag to carry something to work, and my wife handed me her bag. I complained that it wouldn't be manly to carry a pink bag to work and she told me that the bag was actually red. To me the bag looks the same color as the pink lemonade in this picture: http://janeshealthykitchen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Pa...
> No, you said it depends on virtual screen distance, mubard said it depends on solid angle.

No, I said it cannot do virtual screen rendering at lower resolutions. mubard agreed. The virtual screen would look terrible as you pulled back if the resolution wasn't high enough to support it (which I don't believe it is, yet).
Confused: Sqrt(120M) is around 11000. Where did 40K come from?
> The obsession of git users with rewriting history has always puzzled me. I like that the feature exists, because it is very occasionally useful, but it's one of those things you should almost never use.

I disagree, and it's actually impossible not to use it. Rebase rewrites history. If you have a long-running feature branch you need to merge back into master, you have to rebase it against the current master. There's really no other choice.

> The whole point of history is to have a record of what happened.

Define "what happened" in this context...are we talking about what the feature's changes end up looking like, or the entire linear history of the work on this feature starting from the point at which the programmer experimented with a bunch of dead-ends before finding the right path?

Personally, I feel like an extremely detailed history of my personal problem-solving adventure on every complex ticket is irrelevant. At the end of the day, the code reviewer just wants to know what changed. When I review code, I prefer to look at a massive diff of everything that's been done, not read commit-by-commit. I'd rather see exactly what I'm going to pull in when I merge it into master.

I would also disagree with you here that the whole point of source control is to maintain a history of what happened, and argue that the point of source control is communicating changes between developers on a team. The fact that it backs up your code and keeps a history of what changed are merely secondary features to the central value of providing a way of communicating changes to a codebase between developers. I think Git is the best version control system for doing this, because it allows you to rewrite history. That said, rewriting history is very dangerous and if you use it incorrectly (like never ever rewriting history on a branch other people have to pull from), you're

> If you're going around and changing it, then you no longer have a record of what happened, but a record of what you kind of wish had actually happened.

If you're using Git, this is a complete falsehood if you are the person who made the commits. The reflog provides a reference to every single change made to your repository, so you can just reset back to the point before you rebased and voila, like magic everything is back to the way it was. This isn't a "hack", that's what reflog is for. It's a giant undo list for your local clone of the repo.

So in essence, history is never destroyed. It's just hidden from view. You can always go back in Git unless you actually `rm -rf .git/`.

> Some programmers really want to come across as careful, conscientious, thoughtful programmers, but can't actually accomplish it, so instead they do the usual mess, try to clean it up, then go back and make it look like the code was always clean.

You might be correct in some cases, but I think for the majority of the time you are confusing explicitness with vanity. Programmers want other people on their team to know what they did, or at least the intention of their code, and having commit messages that "tell a story" and make sense are vital for doing that.
The MIT license says: "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."

Typically, "Software" means also binaries [1]. The MIT license text is usually included in the software documentation or about box. If you are not sure where to put it, then ask the open source project owners how to attribute them.

[1] http://stackoverflow.com/a/10681216
Seconded! I really enjoyed it - fun hard scifi and almost like two different books (and sets of characters) in one!
I think it depends very much where the emphasis of your effort is spent. Are you writing an analysis tool and then putting up a web front end to show the results, or are you writing web front end to interact with an analysis tool.
It's not necessarily a lie. "Based in" usually just means that's where they operate. The servers can be anywhere. I wouldn't fault them for assuming a modern Western country had enough freedoms to let them host their servers.
That's where I think the being a jerk comes from. I don't think it is something you strive for, but you learn that you have to be strong and correct in the things you do. I think the more a person feels the real pain that comes with failure, the more of a jerk they will become. Some people avoid the risk all together, but they never really end up doing anything great.
The grammatical construction "Blah Blah Considered Harmful" has always bugged me...it doesn't seem proper. Shouldn't it be something like "Blah Blah Should Be Considered Harmful"?
It's "MAFIAA". I mean, if you want to sound like Richard Stallman when you write about this stuff.
I'm talking about both public and private history.

It's far more beneficial to just not make commits like "Derp" or "Whoops" in the first place. Think about your commits and your commit messages as you make them. No, you won't get it right all the time. And that's OK; nobody is perfect, and your history can reflect that you're not perfect. But if you're editing your commit history to fix idiotic commit messages, you're doing it all wrong.
He ignored his own essay, so even the actual substance of the essay could be considered an existential threat to the essay. I have to wonder though if he ignored his own argument whilst in the process of writing his article, because if he truly did so then it probably should have been a dissertation on modalities which I'm sure we all could have readily ignored without doing ourselves much harm. Thus defeating the point of the article, leading to a resurgence of interest in Structuration.

Or to put it more simply: this essay is a plot by the intelligentsia to make us reason like a madman.
That's so funny! Around here people never say "I'm going to hoover the floor" they say "I am going to bissell the floor!!" Bissell must have a greater market share around here!
I understand your perspective on this and have a similar one, however I definitely think a double-standard is applied to these sorts of issues due to the fashionability of certain political stances. For example, Steve Klabnik has tweeted crassly about how capitalists should be killed, but I don't see anyone clamoring to remove him from projects. Those offended by his quasi-threatening political posturing (and there are many) simply aren't interested in publicly silencing him for his opinions, while its become a common tactic for those on the other side of many issues. That disparity is a cause for concern for me, personally.
I only read The Diamond Age. It's setting is grand, immaginative and full of detail. I was specially enamored with the concept of "ractors".

But the last 100 pages left me extremelly dissapointed. Some plot threads go nowhere, others intersect "just because". The whole ending sequence was weird and happened too fast. I guess there was some moral or meaning to the end, but if there was i just didn't get it).

And there was a disgusting thing that happened that left me really disturbed. (I'm usually NOT disturbed by that kind of situation. I guess I was just really attached to the character. And the way it was written was tactless and too casual).

But I loved the rest of the book. I think of it as a great meal with a crappy desert :)

EDIT: About "Ractors": After VR sets in, I can totally see "racting" being the next big thing for entertainment!

EDIT 2: Forgot a "not" in there.
I'm sort of curious how you set up "and then the moon explodes".

Is this the sort of event that has a theoretical foundation in astronomy or physics?
Got some Julia plans or hopes?
One thing to consider -- avoid the 30-year fixed mortgage if you can. If you are buying, then buy a cheaper property that you can pay off in 5 years or so. Then in 5 years, you can sell that and take out another loan for the next property. Example: I bought my house for 180,000 on a 30-year mortgage, and 20% down payment (36,000). 15 years into it I've barely made a dent. I would have been better off buying a $100,000 smaller house or town house/condo, and I could have paid that off in 5 years with what I'm currently putting out per month (counting lower taxes and insurance on the smaller property). Then I could have sold it, and bought a $160,000 house, and 5 years or so later owned that one outright.

This is also a market proof strategy -- if the market goes down, the your current house may lose value (but you're not upside down on your mortgage, because you don't have one after 5 years). But the next house will also be proportionally cheaper too. And if the market goes up, the house you just paid off has gained in value, making for a bigger down payment on the next house.
I'm curious if someone with a lot of experience hosting in (or knowledge of hosting in) various countries in Europe, would opine on which are the least restrictive when it comes to speech?
The Skeptic's Guide podcast has started a segment called 'Forgotten Superheros of Science'. The first episode with the segment is #496 (http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu//496), the 'superheros' are often female. There's a couple reasons for that, the minor reason being the show's only female host, Rebecca Watson, left the show at the end of last year. But, show host Steven Novella has repeated this same narrative (as is made in the article) over the years.

They have covered a few of the women mentioned in this article.

Rosalind Franklin: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu//498

Lise Meitner and ;Ida Tacke: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu//510

Chien-Shiung Hu: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu//518

Full Archive: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu

I apologize for the plug, but it feels relevant.
It would allow languages that use JS as a compile target to skip that intermediate step and output bytecode for the VM, but as I understand it would also allow Javascript to skip that step. Right now every client needs to JIT compile and optimize all code, but if a compiled blob could be sent down instead of minified code, it would be a pretty dramatic shift.
SP: Two-thirds of the way into your novel,
Seveneves – in fact, on page 569 – you do
something kind of crazy. The story suddenly
skips ahead 5,000 years. What’s the idea here?

It took me maybe a week to read the first 2/3's of the book, and about three weeks to read the last 1/3. In many ways, these two parts feel like completely different books, one of which is significantly better than the other.

Also, I was occasionally distracted at the beginning when snippets of dialog from Anathem were reused in the form of exposition in Seveneves.

But, that said, I think the book is worth reading, especially the first 2/3's.

My personal, quick, rough ranking of Stephenson's bibliography:

* Anathem
* Snow Crash
* The Diamond Age
* Seveneves
* Cryptonomicon
* The Baroque Cycle
* Zodiac
* Reamde
* The Interface
* The Big U

Haven't Read

* The Cobweb
* The Mongoliad
It's a five day work week, now better organized for getting everything done and staying sane.
> "I saw Star Trek at the IMAX last night"

This is actually still an example of trademark erosion, even if referring to an actual IMAX theater. This is using the brand to refer to the abstract thing. It's not an IMAX. It's an IMAX theater.

For a relevant example, look at Google's guidance to journalists. They say not to write "I googled X", but "I searched for X using Google". Using "google" as the verb, even when literally referring to Google, erodes the brand, because it conflates the brand with the thing.
I count 30 references to IMAX in the rebuttal, including the image.

Well that shut them up!…
> I agree with you, but only for local commits that haven't been pushed to a shared repo.

Yes, that's why Git doesn't allow you to push rewrites, at least not without '--force'.
First guess was that this was yet another whiny, obtuse reference to something related to the Gamergate persecution complex that grew out of people for SOME REASON objecting to violent threats and doxxing, google search didn't disappoint:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/gamergate-critic-pos...
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/03/that-life-is-over-zoe-...
30 and 1 error, that last one of all purple I just couldn't find it.

I'd bet that monitor panel quality might a big difference.

Edit: Of course, the end text was funny because it said I could spot a mosquito a mile away, which I think has nothing to do with my color accuracy. I wear prescription glasses.
I scored 33.

I found squinting my eyes made it easier to spot the "blob" that had the wrong colour, and this technique made the game a lot easier.
The Rick Ross attributed to this song is not the same person as Freeway Rick Ross.
I think we definitely found the Common Lisper.
Is it really that surprising that a hosting company doesn't want to host a site containing a tonne of hate speech?

There's no amount of money Stormfront could pay me to host their vile outpourings; why should a small site hosting hate speech of every type kick up a big fuss about similar treatment?
Was just about to mention that.
Yes, this is at the top of my list. Thanks :)
VKontakte can't be easily forked, while ReactOS is GPL.

Of course the Russian government wants to be able to control their systems, and any positive effects for others are at best some nice PR.

How does that detract any value from ReactOS (or Linux, which is their "other" desktop and server OS)?

One of the principles of Open Source (compared to Free Software) is the idea that people and organizations work in a project where every contributor works in their self-interest. Why is this suddenly a bad thing?
Good. It's getting tiring seeing bigots, racists and assholes hide behind the veil of "free speech"
Aliasing effects as you don't get 1:1 pixel per rod alignment. Currently we use 16xAA and Sqrt(16) = 4. So, 11,000 * 4 ~= 40K. Though the density is not constant over the eye so that's probably low balling it a little bit.
> Given that, it isn't wholly surprising that their hosting service wanted no part of them.

It is very surprising, the hosting company should be concerned with providing hosting... not moderating content. that's the job of the government and the legal system.
Feeday a new iOS widget for Instagram
Please don't misrepresent what happened. A lot of people, myself included, left Reddit because I don't agree with the way the CEO is handling things. My leaving Reddit had nothing to do with fatpeoplehate being banned. I just don't agree with shadowbanning people and removing -distasteful- subreddits. I just don't visit them.

Reddit has become a marketing tool either way, so I that was just another drop in the bucket for me and I left.
Glad to see this, as I was surprised that there was an entire post about the harm that "considered harmful" essays caused without even citing the original reference that started the whole hoopla, the very-opinionated, very-brilliant and very-legendary Edsger Dijkstra.
Technically speaking, if anyone has ever said that Blah Blah is harmful, than it has been considered harmful. The latter construction with Should Be is a more polite form, but the former is also correct if it's ever been true once.
It depends. If I'm building it for my education/fun I'll carry on. If I'm building to use or for others to use, I'll move on to something else. I have way more project ideas that time to work on them, so I don't want to waste my time.
lol META - was this post a retort to the "gitflow considered harmful" article?
Was this published with the intern's permission?? I have a hard time upvoting this when it's kind of derogatory and personal. It doesn't come across as "advice" so much as complaining about an employee.
As things get smaller a greater PPI is needed to render the same level of detail. You don't mind losing detail, sure, you can keep the resolution the same and keep making it smaller and smaller (distance and size are one in the same in this scenario).

It ultimately boils down to "when detail gets smaller than a single pixel, it is lost." So the smaller the pixel the more detail you can render.

To be honest if you're watching non-HD resolution content, current generation VR headsets at the high end might be able to project it across the room and maintain detail. But HD? S-HD? IMAX? Meh, we aren't there yet.

And I agree with another comment that there is a "cap" on PPI. Once you reach it the human eye becomes the limitation, not the screen(s).
Banks’ ageing IT systems buckle under strain
I've been using git for years and consider myself a fairly sophisticated git user, with a reasonably solid conceptual understanding of what goes on under the covers. I've even performed significant surgery on the jgit codebase (converting it to SHA256 for a security-related project - what a mess).

And yet I don't feel that the learning curve flattens out. I still end up getting wedged into states that send me scrambling for stackoverflow.

Git is incredibly powerful, which is why I use it. But the PC LOAD LETTER comment resonates strongly with me. We can embrace a tool while also acknowledging its faults.
Spam wrapped in a question to bait us into clicking on it... Nice.
> It always feels to me like people just being image-conscious.

Every author is "image-conscious" because they want to present their thoughts clearly to the world. That's where your rather substantial misconceptions about the application and utility of rebasing come from. This isn't about rewriting published history, which is rightly and nearly universally considered A Bad Idea(tm) in the git world. The recommendations around rebasing are essentially identical to authors editing their text before publication. Note "before". Before {an article, some code} is published, edit, rewrite, cleanup all you want. After it's published, an explicit annotation is the best practice. For an author, perhaps an "Updated" note in an article or a printing number in a book. For a developer, add a new commit recording the change.

For my part, I use rebasing extensively and lightly before I publish code. By "extensively" I mean, I just don't hesitate to edit for clarity. This is the same as I'd do in authoring a post or email. By "lightly", I mean that I don't waste time doing radical history surgery but I regularly do things like squash a commit into an earlier logical parent commit. E.g. I started a refactor, then a little while later found some more instances of the same change. Often, this is just amending the HEAD commit, but occasionally I need to go back a short ways on my working branch.

This also fluidly extends to use of git's index and the stash for separating out logical commits from what's in the working copy. A typical example:

1. git add <files for a logical change>

2. git stash -k # put everything not added into the stash

3. # run tests

4. git commit

5. git stash pop

Once you're used to the above workflow, an understanding of git's commit amending and rebasing tools extends this authoring capability into recent history. This is wonderful because it takes pressure off of committing, meaning that git history becomes a powerful first-class, editable history/undo stack.
Sony surprised by Xbox One backwards compatibility, says unlikely for PS4
What's the logical conclusion of that?

The government forcing private companies to host content that they disagree with?

You can't have it both ways.
Making Magic with contenteditable=”true”
It is meaningfully better. Try tracking the debian testing or unstable policies when the software you're trying to update is built against a newer version of a system library. Good luck fixing that. Now you have to update everything that also relies on that library. It's a rabbit hole that's not fun to go down. Even if they're GPG signed -- what does that prove? They could have modified the source when they built the package. At least with the ports tree you can easily verify the checksum of the source you're building with matches what upstream is releasing.

Furthermore, third party repos not by upstream or trusted OS developers is a nightmare. I regularly spend time trying to find trustworthy 3rd party repos to get newer versions of developer tools into RHEL 5/6. Sometimes it's just random RPMs on an FTP or rpmfind.net style sites. Not trustworthy at all. And sometimes I can't even build the package myself because the tool refuses to build because the rest of the OS is too old.

Long term release Linux distros make life hell.
Alain Badiou Is Making a Movie About Plato with Brad Pitt and Sean Connery
معلم+ديكور+بالكويت+-+صباغ+ورسام+-+رسم+غرف+نوم+-+ديكور+اسقف+-+ديكورات+الكويت+-
I can count on zero hands the number of times I've needed to solve a problem by navigating the branch tree.

I've lost count of the number of times that two eternal branches and feature branches with pull requests (+ code review) has saved major flaws from getting to production.

The develop branch is perfect for automatically deploying our bleeding edge to our test server.

Although, if we move to a more continuous deployment approach, we may transition away from two eternal branches. But when GitFlow was first written about, continuous deployment really wasn't the trend that it is now.

Methods will continue to evolve...