skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As always, Wikipedia has a page on just about everything: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic#H...

``In 1998, archaeologists found a well-preserved track leading to a Roman quarry near Swindon, England. The grooves in the road on the left side (viewed facing down the track away from the quarry) were much deeper than those on the right side. These grooves suggest that the Romans drove on the left, at least in this location, since carts would exit the quarry heavily loaded, and enter it empty.''
Or if the writer is in a different mood: PLAN IS NOT GOOD. _red said "The unaddressed issues in this plan will likely make it a very expensive failure!"
I'm really curious how these people are going to feel about themselves in 10-20 years when (hopefully) many of them realize how they're coming across to the non-feral, socialized bulk of humanity. Even into my 20s I thought and said some things that just horrify me now. This was back in the '80s and early '90s, so fortunately none of it's on permanent record the way things are now. I'd like to think I wasn't a bad person, just a product of my environment, but I cringe just thinking about it sometimes.
> moderately armed

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War#1980... :

> In the border region with Pakistan, the mujahideen would often launch 800 rockets per day. Between April 1985 and January 1987, they carried out over 23,500 shelling attacks on government targets.
Ask HN: What new tool or application could be designed by SHELL/BASH coding?
SHELL Scripting is a really interesting way to design new applications or tools. I would really like some ideas as to what someone could make. Domain is not an issue, MAC/Linux portability is.
I've been on a fair number of train rides with group seating, and I've never experienced a problem with it. That's actually worse from your point of view because there's someone directly across from you, not just diagonally across. It's preferable if you're traveling with people you know, and if you don't know them, you simply look at whatever you're reading (or end up talking to them). People tend not to stare directly off into nothing for long periods of time when they're in cramped confines; they do something to occupy themselves, like read a book/magazine, or they close their eyes and rest.
I wish a boy would write me a love letter! It's awesome that trees now get get more love than many women in NYC but if I had the chance I would also write to my favorite tree in Central Park
The beginning the post discusses Nazis and the slaughter of Jews in Amsterdam. Then toward the end, when discussing "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" he fails to mention...

"are you willing to publish your pin code, a high resolution scan of your signature, your passport... Are you ok with your entire family being murdered for their religious affiliation?". If you’re willing to do all of that then congratulations, you really have nothing to hide and the word ‘privacy’ means nothing to you.

Privacy is not just privacy from reasonable people, but unreasonable people as well.
The article mentions that the hexagonical packing had been suggested starting from 2007, and it is essentially used in practice[1], but not with quite the same emphasis on "packing" as the OP post.

They also promoters of the 2007-hexagon also mention the privacy issue as their main guess at why nobody has used their seating.

[1] http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/ba-adds-luxury-touch/2007/09...
The irony goes beyond media content type. To me, the internet promised free speech, a worldwide community, and freedom from oppressive governments. And now it is well on its way to becoming one of the greatest tools for surveillance and oppression that has ever existed.

I'm all for a fresh start.
Ah, sorry. Thanks for the clarification.
> Hey Siri

by the way, I don't like being made to interact with clunky robotic devices in a manner that suggests they might be human for the purpose of [marketing] making unintelligent plebians think 'wow that's cool'. If it's lifelike I'll use it like it's a personality, but otherwise it should just be a set of commands. Stop trying to confuse my socially inept brain
>He was almost recovered. He would have rejoined work in a month, but she rejected that. That reddit was so benevolent to him was thanks to hueypriest and Yishan Wong. She reversed this policy. Now you're saying its appalling that people are criticising Pao because Yishan and hueypriest were so nice.

While she was CEO he got 4 months of the almost two years being paid while too sick to work. He got an extra full year of insurance.

He never had a move date scheduled. He was "2-3 months away" and in his AMA when asked where he was working today? He said he still wasn't feeling well enough for full time work - this was 5 months later. "Sorry, we can't keep waiting, we need someone who can do the job immediately."

So yes it is appalling that this became the reason to be furious, while treating an employee better than he would be treated at 99% of other companies in the US. In a reasonable universe the story would have been: "Wow, reddit treats employees amazingly."
It's probably a false positive from an ad or user content linking to malware. It's already been fixed.
Thanks for sharing, next time somebody tells me news are not fabricated I just pull this up! :)
I'm 1m 96 (around 6'5"). In most planes, the only way to fit my legs is to spread them out to the sides, more or less like this woman: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/06/18/23/29C20B3D0000057...

This design seems to base all the space saving on the constraint that the passengers' legs must be straight, pointing ahead. I just wouldn't fit there.
No. Homotopy Type Theory is a total language, so even type-level programming simply has to terminate, or the proof-checker won't accept it.

Proving that nontrivially recursive programs terminate can be a bugger.
For minor edits in the same document is fine but for a practically full rewrite? No, put links at top or bottom of the article for "You might also be interested in".
> you should be ashamed for being white, check your privilege shitlord

You had to work pretty damn hard to get this out of that quote. His point was that a lot of people who say they (and by extension society, this part is important) don't need privacy probably don't need privacy because their privilege protects them. So then the goal has to be to convince them that their privileged position makes them a special case, and that they should care about the unprivileged. It isn't just white people who have privilege, that's just an example.

This general idea really isn't controversial, but the terminology elicits very strong negative reactions in people for some reason (I honestly don't understand it). If I pointed out that the TSA screens darker-skinned people with extra vigor, often inconveniencing those people, most people would agree with me. If I then said that I don't care about this issue because I'm white, so I breeze through TSA checkpoints without any problems, many people would tell me I should be a little more considerate of others.

But if I call myself "privileged" in this instance then all of a sudden people would be whining about social justice warriors or something like that. Very strange.
> Who dreamed of a highbrow Internet, and how did they get so out of touch with humanity in the first place?

The people who invented it, who wanted a way for scientists to access mainframes using a single network instead of having to use a different network for each different big computer.

Oh, you mean scientists can still do things like that, and that cat GIFs don't prevent it? Shut your mouth!
This is totally out of line, and we ban accounts that do it repeatedly. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> and Google may not have detected all the bad ad services.

You're basically arguing that false positives in an external content blocking service is better than false negatives.

I strongly disagree with that kind of notion. It reeks of nannying.
No, because they aren't stopping. To use your analogy, you must stop taking your antibiotics once the course is done and the infection clear.

Having won all the battles they should have won, the cult is reaching to win battles they shouldn't. Keeping people well informed about the choices they make is good. Keeping public places reasonably free of smoke is good.

But once you inform smokers about the consequences of their choices and prevent them from affecting those who don't want to make those choices ... it's time to step back and allow people to make their own decisions.

If somebody wants to make an unhealthy choice for themselves, I don't have a problem with it. Maybe they'll need to pay a different health insurance premium to make up for it, and that's okay, but otherwise it is not the prerogative of my self or any government to intrude on personal choices which have effects limited to the individual.
To me, it appears that the primary complaints in the linked article are based more on the editorial direction of the changes wrought by additional detail than anything else. There's a reasonable position that not placing the initially reported facts into the larger context and treating it as the local police blotter would be poor journalism. Thus a reasonable explanation is that the first draft did not meet The New York Times's editorial standards. This would not be surprising given the constraints of real time publishing and in light of the fact that The New York Times revises the resources at its primary URI regularly. As we expect.

We're not outraged when other companies change content at a particular URI based on their belief that the changes are an improvement. If there's a SPOT, it is the print edition not the web.
My phone got part way through the process while watching the video. The lock screen prevented it from working.
Thanks for replying with the reference. That is very interesting
> The $100 million acquisition proves that there is no more bar for ‘quality content.’ Quality content is only a fraction of the equation for illustrating #value in a media brand. Projecting the idea of having ‘quality content’ might even be more important than spending money on the production of quality content. It’s just bad business.

> The funny thing is that Dissolve probably had everything a niche content farm needs to be successful.

> But you can’t really justify a ‘team’ of writers producing long content that doesn’t even #perform by today’s content economy standards.

> A site like ViralNova demonstrates just how a generalist content site ruined the web.

[rant]

Articles like this make me want to scream: "your metrics for 'quality' are defined by your philosophy!" Your standards (metrics) are based on your values. Your values, which are hierarchical, are based on your fundamentals. Your fundamentals = your philosophy.

A crime boss rules his neighborhood by threatening people with violence unless they pay extortion. He grows rich in terms of money. His large influence is based on force. For those who fundamentally value quantity of money or influence, by their standards, he has a quality and successful business. For those who fundamentally value honesty or the non-aggression principle [1] in their hierarchy of values as more important, he has a low quality and unsuccessful business.

No, sites like ViralNova haven't ruined the web and, no, I'm not conflating content farms and extortion. ViralNova is giving people want they want. Just as contemporary art is a reflection of the prevailing philosophy [2], so is ViralNova a reflection of ubiquitous standards that trends, "hotness," and money are morally proper reflections of value in and of themselves. To paraphrase a famous book [3], "lowbrow" content is not the root of all evil killing the Internet. You must ask what is at the root of content. Until people start experiencing and learning alternative philosophies, their values won't change. If you want to change the Web and raise the intellectual "bar," you need to focus on the philosophies behind the metrics that define "successful" - not the metrics themselves.

[/rant]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc

[3] http://www.working-minds.com/money.htm
The baffling Chinese stock market bailout raises some unsettling questions
Well, that's not helpful. They already have an answer and it clearly works: because of the terrorists trying to take our land and take away our God!! Think of the children!!

I fail to see how reframing the argument is going to change anything. What we need is WAY more transparency. If there's transparency, then the abuses will be obvious, and once people see the abuses they will say "enough is enough."

That ultimately is why they want to keep this hidden. It's not because the "terrorists" will find out, it's because WE will find out and we won't like what we see.

Tit for Tat. If you want to take away our privacy, then we MUST have complete transparency in return.
They could overlay the message or have an information bar or whatever. UI design is not an argument against more measured blocking.

I don't see a technical necessity to block a whole top-level page when the security model of a browser consists of many different origins.
Could you give pointers wrt cubical model being a dead end? As yet I've heard nothing about this.
By definition, this question is off-topic. That said, there are exceptional cases where SO community appreciates the valuable information provided by the answers and marks a question as protected. For example:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1711/what-is-the-single-m...

This is one of these rare cases. I'm glad that this question was re-opened and got protected - I think that was the right thing to do.

All that said, I'm sick and tired of all the winning I hear about SO lately, so many complaints, yet, everyone keeps using it.

I do not encourage a vicious behavior as sometimes seen in SO but I also don't like to watch people post again and again the same questions that have been answered multiple times and could be found in a simple google search (and which probably show on the right bar when they compose the question).

I'm also tired of people complaining about closing questions - dudes, if you don't want your question to get closed pretty please put some effort in it! do your research, post what you're tried, compose a minimal working example that reproduces the error, post a FULL stacktrace and show which line triggered it. But no, people don't like to "work hard" so they put all the burden on the people that are here to help them. This is NOT cool. So yes, fuck yes - I will keep voting to close poor questions, and even (potentially) good questions that the author didn't bother to give a fuck about making it clear, readable & reproducable (but please do not dump all your code and expect me to read it if only one small method is relevant) and no - this is almost always NOT a language/culture issue - regardless of what some people say.

Bottom line: they say "in rome act like romans" - well when you join a community you should follow the community rules. Take a few minutes to go through the help center, see if what you're asking is on-topic. Learn how to post a new (good) question. Hell, even ask someone you know to read what you've written and give you the feedback if it's clear and if it makes sense. You want help? so put the time and effort so that we won't waste our time & effort when we try to help you!

Have a nice weekend!

P.S.
Those who know me, know that I like to help people regardless of what I just wrote (example):
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31358932/is-there-a-payme...

but I really am tired of hearing all the criticism. It bothers me especially when I recognize that it comes from intelligent people that I'm not sure if they're just "playing dumb" or being a "smartass".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Help us help you!
I don't get that angle at all.

Issues of gender are perfectly relevant in tech. But the issue wasn't gender - it was basic competence and cultural fit.

IMO Reddit would be absolutely fine with a good female CEO. But Pao wasn't a good Reddit CEO, she was a terrible Reddit CEO. Her gender is incidental to that.

So when journalists try to frame the narrative as "cellar-dwelling young male mouthbreathers vs a shocked and innocent victim of disgusting sexism" - that's heavy-handed editorialising at best, and plain bullshit at worst.

Now - there's always been a thick and disgusting stream of bullshit running through trad media. (See also, Fox News.)

But that's a problem with the old journalistic model, which was (is...) based on selling opinion-shaping to advertisers, sponsors, and media owners.

Pretending the Internet is worse than that seems very self-indulgent.

It's also a rather panicked attempt to undermine the effectiveness of Internet communities as opinion-forming media machines in their own right. The machines happen to self-assemble rather than being engineered in a top-down way like trad media, and they're certainly more open than they believe to external influence.

Even so. The newsies aren't just losing the ad sale and eyeball space, they're also losing the traditional op-ed space to spontaneous community narratives.

If you're an editor, that's a serious problem. If you lose both eyeballs and PR leverage, you really have no reason to exist at all.
The highbrow Internet isn't hindered in any way by the chans or the cat GIFs or whatever the current New Media bogeyman is. The great thing about the Internet is that it gives you infinite room to build what you want.
In the typical groups seating on trains, you are however seated far enough apart that only rarely do you have to touch the feet of the other passengers. In the hexagonal seating you are spaced such that if you lean back, the natural resting place of your hands would be the wrists of the person opposite you.

That is a bit more personal.
I think many people (particularly those who have not done any research, moms, grandparents, etc.) associate the Beats brand recognition with perceived quality. "Oh I see those commercials all the time, and I see people wearing them, they must be good!" sort of thing.
Inability to keep an immutable record of what's been published disqualifies nyt from its claim of being "the paper of record".
112 hours is not light usage..
>> They are buying for style and recognition. The same stuff that Apple has played on us all these years.

I'm not a big fan of Apple these days, but Apple products generally do have better than average build quality -as well as- good design and looks.

They are indeed premium priced, but that's a marketing choice. You might be able to nitpick Apple products' value by specs, but I don't think you can really put them in the same bin as Beats (even though Apple now owns Beats) with respect to quality.
The idea is that because of the poly in the mains you can generally string your racket at a lower tension (including the gut in the crosses), which increases power (without the gripping poly you couldn't use low tensions because the ball would fly on you on anything but the first serve).
http://www.head-fi.org has always served me pretty well for audio reviews. I don't often dip into this market, so this might have changed in recent years.
10 Most Overused PC Buzzwords (1988)
iOS: Settings -> General -> Siri -> Toggle "Allow 'Hey Siri'"
There is a very clear movement in journalism to create the narrative that Ellen Pao is a feminist hero. Apparently the NYT is in that cabal.
Same thing happens with reporting on Qatar death toll of building stadiums for the World Cup in 2022, they have used a total number of deaths of immigrants in Qatar instead of those who build stadiums ( their overall death rate is on par with other counties even UK and USA), they have edited [1] the article since then but the original impression has been made and now people are throwing invalid "facts" everywhere blaming Qatar of slave workers deaths for building stadium.

[1] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/05/27/a...
Don't worry, only the people facing forward need take a "crash position". If you face backward you can keep reading your magazine safe in the knowledge that any way it goes you'll probably be much better off than your neighbours.
Yeah, it's a pretty good example of what has become of news reporting. It has an instance of almost every common issue, except misinterpreting statistics.

Emotionally loaded language. Blatant fact framing. Suppositions. Presenting one side of a controversial issue as an opinion of absolute majority. Manufacturing "context" out of true, but mostly unrelated facts.

It's especially striking in contrast to the original, reasonably balanced, text. Sort of like "before" and "after" pictures.
> Why are they truncating 64-bit pointers to 32-bit values?

Maybe to get more compact data structures? But in that case they shouldn't rely on that and try detecting that behavior at runtime.

E.g. the hotspot jvm tries to map memory in the low end of address space to compress pointers but falls back to full pointers when that fails.
It's interesting to me how many reddit free speech defenders say stuff like "Free speech is meant to protect the most disgusting, heinous, pointless, hateful, ignorant, foolish speech."

While I agree that pointless, hateful etc. speech deserves protection one word I almost never see in the reddit free speech wars is *dissent. As in "free speech is meant to protect speech that opposes or challenges orthodox opinion and conventional wisdom."

It's almost like the most vocal part of reddit gets off on being offensive for its own sake and is more concerned about the right to call fat people names rather than defending free speech generally. It does seems like they are flying the free speech flag purely out of narrow self-interest.

How many of them actually give a crap about free speech outside of their "community"? How many of them regularly downvote opinions they don't agree with, I wonder?
I think the major security concern is over blackmail, considering the stolen data concerned people with US government security clearances.
I think you are missing the point. Sure, it's an overreaction but if an individual did it as a prank you can bet some prosecutor would try to make a name for themselves by throwing the book at them. What's fair for the goose...
6'7" here. The expression "comically unworkable" springs to mind.
Tell that to the Mujahideen, the Viet Cong, and the 2003- Iraqi Insurgency. You could make the case that in the latter two conflicts, the more mighty power was unwilling to commit total war [1], but I would like to believe that the US military would not commit total war against its own people. At some point there is nothing left to rule.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war
Interesting article. I enjoyed this part in particular:

> Pakistan also considered changing to the right in the 1960s, but ultimately decided not to do it. The main argument against the shift was that camel trains often drove through the night while their drivers were dozing. The difficulty in teaching old camels new tricks was decisive in forcing Pakistan to reject the change.
The Times (as of 2008) was explicit that they had two stages for online publication (see http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/washington/11askthetimes.h...).

The "Continuous News Desk" correspondent quickly write an article, in consultation with reporters. But the final draft of the article -- for print publication -- could be entirely different and with a different byline. I'm wondering if the techraptor reporter is noticing not a conspiracy to editorialize, but rather the difference between the breaking news story (just-the-facts) and a semi-considered story (context).
The Rise of the Bot Nation on Slack