skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On the flip side, SCOTUS rulings have the power to accelerate trends already happening in society. Making segregation in schools and in housing illegal does not eliminate racism. But it does lead to a generation of people that aren't raised in schools and neighborhoods that only have people of one race.
> Convincing 5 of the top judges is easy compared to convincing the populace

About 60% of US residents now support gay marriage and consider it a right, according to the polls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_of_same-sex_mar...
FLIR's thermal camera is out for iOS, Android to follow
Just a random thought but you could argue age discrimination is still equal because except for death, everyone goes through the same ages. In other words, when you're 25 you'll be treated by the law the same as other 25yr olds.

Brothers and sisters does seems to me like it's just people think of it as icky. Some cultures encourage marrying first cousins and the genetic risks are minimal. And even people that aren't related can and are tested for whether their genes combined will likely lead to genetic issues with their children. In other words the genetic risk is mostly not a valid excuse to ban siblings from marrying anymore than not being able to create children is for same sex couples.
I believe the issue is that by passing a law prohibiting granting a marriage license to a same-sex couple, a State is violating that couple's Fourteenth Amendment right to life, liberty, and equal protection, among other things.

I will admit that there were a lot of high-soaring words that might have covered up the legal basis, but to me, the legal component of the ruling was simply:

1) The court finds that marriage is an inherent part of life and liberty (arguably the shakiest part)

2) A State passing a law prohibiting marriage by one specific group of people is taking away their rights of life and liberty

3) Therefore, said law is found to violate the Fourteenth Amendment which grants life, liberty, and equal protection under the law to all United States citizens, and is thus unconstitutional.
The Constitution 'grants us rights' in the way that it prevents the government from infringing upon them.
So according to this ruling, the right for two men to marry has been "lurking" in the Constitution since 1868, right? But we just now discovered it? What I mean is that if someone had brought this case before the Supreme Court in 1870, the legally correct decision would have been to allow gay marriage? Things like that make me wonder what other "rights" (scare quotes because they are things that would not be considered rights today) are hidden in the Constitution, that will be discovered 150 years hence but would shock the conscience of nearly everyone alive today.
The rioting tells me that we haven't agreed, at all.
MirageOS v2.5 with full TLS support
I do by chance consume all of my media in legal ways (I just don't consume that much; Netflix, Spotify, Hulu for the occasional Daily Show, that's it).

Content providers need to get paid just as much as taxi drivers, taxi drivers even moreso. Content providers can take advantage of the zero marginal cost of them distributing their product, taxi drivers are stuck working at an hourly wage, and for them not to receive at least an hourly wage is tantamount to theft.
The best job opportunity for them is the best job opportunity for them. I wouldn't blame Uber for the fact that their driver jobs might not be some idealized version of the best possible job. For many of the drivers, it presumably is the best possible job they can get. I'd blame every other company who couldn't do better, not the one company who seems to be giving the best opportunity.
the word "regulated" is the third word of the second amendment.
I've heard this argument before, but I'm not sure I understand how that is different from what's going on now. It seems to just be semantics. The Catholic Church is still free to only marry Catholics and ignore the rest. That doesn't change. And people are still able to go through religious marriage ceremonies without bothering to be recognized by the state.

Personally I was married in a religious ceremony and then had to submit paperwork for it to be recognized civilly.
Skype Switched to the MSN Messenger Protocol (2014)
Hi Sam and Kevin,

We built ObjectiveFS, it's like Dropbox, but for servers. We have users running our shared file system in production, and are getting great feedback.

Our current challenges are user growth and upcoming competition from Amazon EFS.

We would like your feedback on what we can do on our website (http://objectivefs.com) or additional things we can do to get more people to start our free trial and to address the Amazon EFS competition.

Thanks!
Presumably it's now owned by his estate, like the rest of his assets.
Some good pointers and links here, surprisingly they miss both my favourite approaches.

1. If it's on Github, find an issue that seems up your alley and check the commits against it. Or the commit log in general for some interesting commits. I often use this approach to guide other devs to implement a new feature using nothing more than a previous commit or issue as a reference and starting point.

2. Unit tests are a great way to get jump started. It functions as a comprehensive examples reference--having both simple and complex examples and workflows. Not only will it contain API examples but it will also let you use experiment with the library using the unit test code as a sandbox.
Relevant.ai

Hey guys,
Our platform unbundles apps' and websites' most essential features and transforms them to interactive Cards. Similar to Google Now Cards. However the entire architecture is designed to be an open platform. Meaning anybody could come and build these interactive cards using our Language, REL. We believe, by unbundling Applications/WebService we can seamlessly start connecting different pieces of the web together, and create a more fluid and unified internet experience. An experience with an intelligent fabric that grows with our needs, preferences and expectations to help us make the right decision, at the right time.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on Relevant. Thanks!
I've committed a Linux version that for sure uses libedit. It is decidedly not my intention to use libreadline.
Everybody in the thread were talking about 'indefinitely' - you are forced to hit 'eject' to safely remove USB storage. This is required even if its many seconds or minutes after use.
AirBnB raises $1.5B at $24B valuation
It takes a lot of imagination to think that the founders had any vision of the laws that the commerce clause would be used to justify today.

It took me a long time to realize that whether or not the constitution was designed or intentioned as a "living document" is completely irrelevant. What matters is how the process actually works today, and it works as if the constitution is a living document, therefore it is a living document. See also: Duck typing.
> My intent here is not to make any overly simplistic sweeping claims, but to point out that there are some thoughtful and powerful lines of reasoning that call into question the morality of many existing labor regulations.

I don't believe we disagree on this. Labor laws are a balance between the right of a citizen to earn a living wage and the right of a consumer to engage in commerce permitted by the State.

With that said, I believe that consumer sovereignty should never take precedence over labor rights.
Amazon to Remove Confederate Flag Items
Yes! I really, really liked Ely's _Democracy and Distrust_. I don't know how current its ideas are (it's from 1980), but someone recommended it on some legal thread somewhere and I found it both super easy to read and also very illuminating.

Here's Posner on it, FWIW:

http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...
>Frankly, consumer's demands and rights take a backseat to the rights of citizens of a country.

What? Consumers are citizens as well...
Gay people do not have to be born gay, even if the radical majority tend to be.

There is nothing that prevents a person from deciding they want to experiment sexually, or completely alter their sexual identity, at any given time.

It would be a form of bigotry to proclaim that straight people can't choose to be gay of their own free will, and vice versa. It would imply we're not in control of our own sexuality, and that we lack free will.

And this is not a support of the bigots that proclaim that being gay is always a choice and that gay people should just stop pretending and change their minds --- those people were always in the wrong, their argument was always vile. Sticking to the: gay people are all born gay, premise, is a defeatist response to that bigotry, it's a very very poor defense when a defense is not needed at all.

The proper position is: if I want to be straight or gay, it is my choice, period. If I'm born gay, that's fine; if I'm born gay and want to be straight, that's fine; if I'm born gay and only want to be gay, that's fine. And so on.
I am one of those religious types - if I may give you me reasoning or at least my ideas:

The immediate difficulty comes when we as religious citizens have trouble with separating what is civilly permissible with what is a religious ideal.

Long term, religious people are worried that our institution and faith will not be allowed to continue if a super-majority deems us unworthy - as we have seen through history.

As for me I'm not terribly upset at all as over my short life I should be infinitely more worried about my sacramental relationship with my wife than what others claim marriage should look like.

I would also point out from a religious standpoint that some people have found solace today actually points to the reality of how wonderful sacramental marriage truly is.
A root repository has pretty much always a big advantage, and it's usually always the one with most star and watchers.
If you were to sort everything only on the basis of popularity, not much would change, except perhaps a few notable exceptions. It would just be more fair.
I'm making a competitive real-time strategy game like starcraft (which is declining) but without the punitive aspect of the game which is why a massive number of players stop playing it I think. Starcraft is also the only decent competitive RTS on the market right now, a successor can grow at startup-level in the long term I beleive.

I have a solid engine, nothing launched yet.

My question is: why would you not fund this project right now? What could I do to improve my odds of getting funding?
It takes imagination for the founding fathers to allow women to vote. We own the constitution; its ours to interpret and change.
So stop giving those services your money and patronage. As long as people keep paying them, the market will continue to provide what they see people are willing to pay for.

Effecting change is rarely easy, and often requires sacrifice, but fortunately one of the benefits of the internet is that we have access to a lot more options.

Also, remember that the longer a power is entrenched as the status quo, the harder it is to change it. I strongly encourage making any necessary sacrifices to help fight DRM, walled gardens, and the like now, because waiting will only make the problem worse. Right now it might only require avoiding stuff like Netflix, which is a luxury. It will be a lot harder once the MPAA/etc decide there are too many workarounds for Netflix and start pressuring OEMs to start using the new Intel SGX to setup the "trusted execution environment" they've always wanted.
Looks as if somebody was watching too much tv in the 1970/80s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_from_Atlantis
Ask HN: Shall we use Coffeescript or ES6?
we build a new project with nodejs. we love the coffeescript syntax but seams like ES6 has a lot to offer as well.
what should we use?
Strictly speaking it means the laws against gay marriage were themselves illegal. (As with any law deemed unconstitutional.) It's a matter of word choice to say "gay marriage was always legal" versus "anti-gay marriage laws were always illegal". There's some semantic difference between the two, but I'm not sure what the difference is from a judicial standpoint.
He didn't say anything about 12-year-olds marrying each other. You're assuming that's what he meant. He could have meant that, or he could have meant 12-year-olds marrying 40-year-olds.
I actually agree that the biggest cost of a bad employee is a management failure to either create an environment that the employee can thrive or is too "nice" to confront reality and get rid of them quickly.
I can't speak to your experiences and I never said bad hires were costly due to the employee vs. Management screwups. The simple reality is that every day a bad hire is in place, is a day that a much more productive employee is not in place, which costs could be astronomical.

The bottom line is that "slow to hire and fast to fire" as difficult as it is, is very sound advice!

Without knowing you and jumping to a conclusion based on your comment, I assume you don't appreciate that employee boss relationships are adversarial by nature and there is often considerations management makes that might seem bad but are really a product of their understanding of whats possible and realistic within limiting circumstances...

I used to complain with my friends about all the things we would change in our boss and the company we worked for and now after many years I realize that at the time I had no flipping clue about anything.
Rights that are not backed by Law do not materially exist. That is why the Bill of Rights (and related documents in other countries) had to be written in the first place.
Being 12 is not a permanent condition, while generally race and sexuality are. While being 12 is not a choice - it's forced on most people - they also generally stop being 12, usually within a year or so of the condition.
Nothing about marriage has anything to do with liberation or equality. That's a modern attitude. Marriage is associated with the treatment of a person as property and arrangements for political and financial reasons, even to this day. And yet here you are, saying one type of marriage is okay and the other kind that you're not particularly close to is associated with Mormons and Muslims and antiprogressivism, while lauding a modern view on one marriage and taking the dated view on another.

The reason plurals doesn't flourish, to you, is because the people who practice it don't tell you, lest you tell them what you just told us, and the inevitable "are you Mormon?"
The risks are not "minimal". There are increased risks in cultures where first cousins marry. Part of that is that married first cousins have an increased risk of having children with birth defects. And part of it is that people are more related than they think if everyone is marrying a first cousin.

The link I posted earlier deals with this.
> Welp, this causes a huge disparity because the bill comes in and either you need to go line by line to get the total, then impose a line by line tip

The alternative is to make the waiter go around and handle each guest individually. In scenarios where a single payer isn't available and just "collectively putting some cash on the table until it's OK" is not an option, this works quite well. Restaurant staff I think like it as well, because overall the tip will probably be larger.
That's arguable - folks are notoriously incapable of controlling their sexuality, to the point its reasonable to postulate free will has nothing to do with it.
> Today's decision pushes back the more important goals of social equality and cultural integration. ... there are no and have been no segregation laws in America for decades as a result of federal action, but you'd be silly to say the result was that segregation does not exist in America.

As a counterpoint: Since the civil rights era, the welfare and integration of the black-skinned Americans has improved dramatically. Some argue that desegregation alienated more hearts and minds than it helped, but I've yet to see any evidence. Certainly American opinions about blacks also have changed dramatically. (But I agree that we do have a long way to go.)

> No hearts and no minds are changed as a result of the supreme court rulings, just the code powering the justice system ...

I'm not sure no hearts and minds were changed -- I suspect many will reconsider, having seen the decision of a respected institution and the direction of society -- but I agree that you can't do that by court order. But there is a very substantive change: Gay Americans now can get married!
The valley's not the only place I've ever lived. I grew up in Boston, which certainly has its share of inclement weather, one-lane roads, roads without lane markers, one-way streets, 3 left turns that don't make a right, lack of signage, etc. All of these are challenges, but they're not insurmountable challenges.

I'm pretty sure I've seen self-driving cars on Highway 1 in California, for example, which has construction, cattle gratings, one-lane segments, a lot of twists and turns, pull-offs, and places where it gets very narrow and you have to pull off and let opposing traffic pass. They had safety drivers, but I think this means that Google's at least considering these driving conditions in their software.
>Claimed societal interest in preventing harm to offspring born from inbreeding.

If that's a valid argument, why isn't the same argument [1] against gays valid? Conversely, if greater risk isn't enough of a constitutional reason to allow bans on gay marriage, why is it enough to make incest bans constitutional?

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/
And I know one who's excellent at the math to the complete ignorance of actually understanding what's physically going on. Once he has a differential equation written that's the law, full stop. Even if it produces results that can't possibly be right re: physical reality. Drives me bananas.
It's Important to Be a Full Stack Developer
Uber seems to be the type of organization that benefits even from bad news. I'm cynical enough to believe their heavy-handed method of operating is part of their marketing strategy.
Tasqr (http://www.tasqr.io) makes it very easy for developers to ship their software to the cloud automatically, and very frequently. Developers and operations engineers typically have an understanding of how to manually configure and deploy their software via the command line. Tasqr leverages this existing knowledge in teams by helping them record their manual steps and replay them onto their live deployments. This allows engineers to operate in a language/environment they are already comfortable with- the command line.

My strategy thus far has been to find startups that need help doing their devops and help them automate their deployment using Tasqr. Finding customers this way has been slow, but I've gotten to learn quite a bit about how the product fits within a continuous integration workflow. I am starting to feel a little financial pressure to change my approach and scale my outreach, though my existing users really like my "do things that don't scale approach" unsurprisingly :-)

What are some signs that it's the right time to scale and chase bigger chunks of the market?
I simply find it annoying that I have to use a User agent switcher to use a mobile site on desktop...
Livescript - http://livescript.net
Based on this flowery language on the 14th Amendment in the majority opinion, I'm having trouble understanding why the 14th Amendment doesn't make marijuana bans illegal too.
Not true. Terrorism is only done by those who are opposed to US foreign policy.
Marriage of course depends entirely upon the married, their culture and their interpretation. Especially in America where we have fused 100 cultures and traditions, there's little you can call universal truths about marriage.
"The Contitution, the Bill of Rights in particular, protects minority rights"...

"minority" should be replace with "individual". An individual is the greatest minority.
The term of art for 1-woman, multi-husband arrangements is "polyandry". The Wikipedia entry [1] has a citation to a survey that finds about 50 out of about 1230 known societies in a 1980 ethnographic atlas practicing polyandry, so it is a distinct minority community-scale arrangement.

The next public, conventional taboo to broach is group and line marriages. As economic conditions worsen for some nations' middle class in the upcoming decades, line marriage can potentially offer a coping mechanism, trading off resource collectivization and time in exchange for recapturing increased security of various forms.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry
> That's not a good footing for our society to be on.

That's actually very good footing for our society to be on. It means that the law can change as society changes over time. Future societies will not be bound to outdated precepts established by people who have never lived in their world.

We tend to think of laws as these unchanging concepts, perfectly created, but they are not. Ultimately laws are created by mankind and interpreted by the same. We may believe that they derive from a higher power, but we have no absolute proof of that higher power and thus, the law must begin and end with Man.

If some deity is willing to descend to the mortal plane and lay down The Law, then he/she or it welcome to do so. Until then, we are stuck with the best that we ourselves can do.
Thank you so much for checking it out :)
The debugger being sequential is a consequence of your code also being sequential at the CPU level.

Understanding the code is often a luxury we don't have, either because we didn't write it in the first place or because there are just too many moving parts each tracking their own state and interacting with everything under the sun.

This is especially true for long-running programs that do much more than just transform inputs into outputs. For example a video game would be complete hell to develop without a solid debugger. Even if you believe you understand the complete code and all its behavior the testers will always find a way to make the game crash after 2 hours of playing leaving the game's state completely broken and without a debugger you'll be scratching your head endlessly trying to replay how that happened.

In these cases the number of different states and behaviors you can get out of the system is incredibly high, easily a few orders of magnitude more than the human brain can handle.
Who still carries cash?
I think you nailed it. Awesome, thanks!

Although in this case it'd be the reverse -- rays moving into the corona, not out of it.
In the throughput graph, why does Haxl perform worse in the 3 most common request types?
My friends all use Venmo. I paid for lunch once so I'd have some credit in their system. Then I use that for future lunches.
Exactly this, and I'm disinclined to assume too much good faith in the sort of rhetoric he deployed.
They just updated the article it seems with a quote from a Google spokeswoman

> Courtney Hohne, a Google spokeswoman, e-mailed Ars: "The headline here is that two self-driving cars did what they were supposed to do in an ordinary everyday driving scenario."
Coaching by Matrix Theory ( Choice Theory,1998 by William Glasser Institute.)
Thanks for sharing. For someone in their early career like me, this is very useful.
> Some states have low taxes.

Some states have no taxes. Contrast Washington (state) and Oregon. Oregon has no sales tax, but an income tax. Washington has sales tax, but no income tax.

In Portland (which is right on the Washington-Oregon border), I recall a car with the license plate "TAXFREE," which was ambiguous enough that I couldn't figure out if it was referring to the owner being "tax free" (paying no income tax living in Washington) or that the car was "tax free" (the owner paid no sales tax when purchasing it in Oregon).