skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>I think your comments, in conjunction with enraged_camel's

It wasn't coordinated, I can't even recall if I have ever replied to camel's posts before today.

>I'm a little perplexed. Had this discussion been about the more normal HN fare, it would have been quite different.

If it involves politics, surveillance, defense/aerospace, criminal or civil law, securities trading, feminism/women in tech, encryption, Linus Torvalds, etc, there is a likelihood of a spirited debate. I've probably forgotten a few subjects, but the F-35 is not the only issue that people get [perhaps too] excited about.

>Would you have me email you and let us have a discussion there, privately?

No thank you, I have no desire to have an argument in private about the F-35. I'm not even sure why I spend any time at all on the subject other than I like tech and flying, and in attempting to be an informed consumer of government. My email is easy to find if you need to for some reason but I really prefer having these discussions in public.

>It's, as another user said, about the military/industrial complex elephant.

There's more than one elephant. There are plenty who object to the fact that we put any effort into killing people. Various degrees of us who'd just like to kill a lot fewer people. And then those who don't mind killing people, but want it to be done efficiently. And, I think those who are indifferent to the killing of people, as long as they can get rich off of it (no, that's not meant to be a cheap-shot at salary-people who work in defense).

>What would you have me do?

As I said previously. I think you should disclose your association with the defense/aerospace industry, and you should do that when you join a discussion. I would feel the same if you were employed in most any other industry, and commenting in a similar manner. You don't need to reveal your location or employer or anything like that; and frankly, you need to tolerate or at least expect some skepticism about your motives.

>I do tend to comment on aerospace matters. Primarily because that's what I do.

Then you must no doubt be familiar with the fact that the F-35 project is controversial both inside and outside the .mil and the defense industry. The internet is lousy with these kinds of discussions; it's the greatest peanut gallery the world has ever known. In some of these discussions are a few people who'd apparently like to have us all believe that the F-35 is going to win all of the battles against any adversary anywhere, any time, at any place, ever; do it all for cheap, and then precision-airdrop hot-buttered toast and letters from mom to the ground troops on its way home. I'm glad that you've attempted to constrain your posts to facts which can be confirmed, but also remember that the facts are suspect where it involves next-get .mil-tech. The .mil may or may not [probably won't] release info that could damage the project, and they won't release full performance specs, either; under the naive notion/excuse that potential adversaries can't get that kind of information.
To be fair to Microsoft, you used to have to pay for Solitaire to get your free copy of Windows, now they've unbundled it you can get Windows 10 for free without having to buy Solitaire.
Any multiplayer game when you cant buy anything that helps you win, yet receive constant free gameplay content built with moneys of those who want to buy cosmetics, i.e. league of legends, team fortress and the like.
Such an imaginative title.
What country do you live in where it is impossible to make a mistake and then get societal help to recover?

Truly the US hasn't been the same since the government paid off all overly large student loans, irresponsibly spent credit card balances, desperately sought payday loans, and other avoidable, life-destroying debt. And since all of that debt has been canceled, I'm looking for a more responsible place to live.

I'm just glad that US banks don't allow truly predatory acts, such as the use of a pension as the down payment for a house, so that a borrower who defaults loses far more than their home. That sort of behavior is legal in some uncivilized regimes because it allows lenders to make bad loans without suffering any negative recourse; but fortunately it is not legal in the US.
This is one of the clearest and understandable-without-prior-knowledge descriptions of the project I've seen so far, can anyone familiar with the details weigh in on how accurate it is?

EDIT: not-so-happy sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9987351
Yeah what if the website isn't finished? Does the seller still get paid? I really wonder how they plan on solving conditional logic that depends on programmatic sources.

What happens if you want to change the contract? How do you revoke the previous one? I suppose this would have to be done in a manner that involves both parties, some sort of two part signing process.

What if there's a bug in the contract? The contract then becomes ambiguous and you're left with the same problem.
Tell HN: Friendly reminder, if on Sat you're chilling with friends or family
instead of working on your startup/idea 6 days a week. You will most probably not make it.
This seems like a thoughtful piece, not clickbait at all; the headline hardly seems inflammatory or sensationalistic to me.
And you would be giving young people exceptionally bad advice...financial responsibility teaches so many things beyond money.
If find it unfair that you put YC startups job ads between the stories, but do not allow the rest to do the same. Shame on you!
Oh so that's why half the embedded videos I see are black boxes. Oh well, that's why I keep IE (with no Ghostery) around, for cases where I really want to see the video. Seems like a good arrangement so far.
> So if it fails while having had good intentions, there's nothing more to be done?

I think that that is not what the article is saying at all; rather it is saying that your dissatisfaction (not you personally!) with the course of justice does not excuse your taking justice into your own hands.
This is intended to be used without jQuery :)
I don't think I've actually bought a novel product because of an ad (but perhaps brand awareness has worked to remind me to consume things one time or another) -- but I still find it a lack of imagination to think there's absolutely nothing you could discover. Never had your friends show you an interesting product, tool, website? It could be an automated ad network showing it instead.

Moreover, our individual experiences do not generalize well to the rest of the population if we're particularly frugal.
Well, technically it's been that way since Windows 8.1

People are mainly noticing now because its one of the default apps again.
This worries me. It has become acceptable for companies to shut down controvertial communities/forums. The precedent has been set that if you have an offensive community on your service, the appropriate action is to remove it.

The line between acceptable and unacceptable content is not clearly drawn, there is no trial or court system, and if a government was doing the same thing there would be strong freedom of speech concerns. If this continues, more and more controversial communities are going to be shut out of greater and greater portions of the web.

Communities like these are often important for challenging the status quo. It's not too hard to imagine that 50 years ago communities supporting homosexuality would be straddling some line of controversy. For example, Grindr would have almost certainly been illegal.

There are many reasons why it is important to protect the speech rights of people you disagree with. Important progressive ideas very often come from outside the realm of what is considered acceptable to the rest of society. The more we stamp out controversial and distasteful communities, the more at risk we become of supporting and perpetuating regressive ideas without even realizing it. People 50 years ago opposed homosexuality, and 350 years ago any religion outside of Catholicism was not tolerated. We don't have a good way today of knowing what things we do today that will seem horribly regressive 100 years from now, and we won't have a way of figuring it out if we don't allow controversial ideas to exist in our primary thought spaces.
I don't expect everyone to like me. I don't expect everyone to like the plane, either. There are days when I don't like it very much.

What you did seemed very personal to me in the moment I read your comment. I got a sinking feeling in my chest. Because I don't know who you are, and what your motives are. Now, from seeing further discussion with you, I don't think you mean anything malicious, but I had that little momentary stab of unease.
For me, range (the posted source) took 95 seconds, and xrange was only a little better at 85 seconds.

I think most of the benefit of xrange comes from the decreased memory usage, not from lower CPU usage. But xrange is definitely closer to what the other code is doing.
>Seems to me the article is fighting some kind of giant strawman. I myself haven't experiences this kind of attitude.

For real? Because it shows up in HN all the time.

E.g. for what he writes:

>The IT world is rife with this ‘no true programmer’ nonsense, the ‘real’ programmers are the ones that have mastered ‘x’ (insert name of arcane and difficult to use programming language here), the rest is still stuck on ‘y’ (insert accessible and easy to use language here). The latter of course aren’t real programmers, if they were then they would get it.

How's that not an example of "the Blub" reasoning? http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
How will this boost your business' bottom line, and boost it more than alternative investments?

Remember the costs: Not only buying new computers but buying some/many new user applications, retraining users on the OS and applications; rebuilding systems that integrated with the old platform and apps; replacing or rebuilding IT management systems that manage testing, deployment, configuration, patching, and support of thousands (or more) of computers and users; retraining or replacing much of your IT staff; testing and deploying all these things (with newly trained staff using new tools); and all the costly downtime that results from the inevitable bugs of new systems, greatly compounded by deploying all these new systems together: e.g., Why can't they print? The new OS? The new printer driver? The new printer config? The new application? The new user errors?

What does the business gain? Instead of clicking an icon on the Windows desktop, the employees click one on the Mac desktop. Then their application or browser opens and they do the same thing they did last week (except for having to be retrained to do the same task in a new way).
Windows 10 isn't free, only the upgrade (from 7/8/8.1) is, and it's a limited time offer.
I agree, most of the code in the library is for element navigation. Why not open-source that and let people define their own CSS props.

By the way, I believe it uses the `outline` CSS property as opposed to `border` (border changes layout, outline doesn't).
If someone came up with a way of doing large scale fleet management of Mac devices (software installs, updates, rights management et al) in a vaugley similar way to the way Windows env (eg point and click) they'd make an absolutely fortune.
To clarify: are interesting blog posts that double as job ads still allowed? It's fairly common for companies to post good technical blog posts that are also meant as a "look at this fascinating stuff we're doing – you could be doing it too!"
> Presumably, the same, or almost the same, outcome (of his dental practice being closed, not the other harrassment) would occur if he were, say, imprisoned for his actions after a lawful trial, but no-one would claim that it was the court's responsibility to "find new jobs for the innocent dental employees it is [putting] out of work."

This goes back to the difference between an internet mob and a court. The internet mob acts on moral outrage. It is inconsistent for them to be outraged about the death of a lion and not outraged about innocents losing income.

The court acts on legal principles. Legally, if the dentist is to be punished, that's where it ends.
Definitely interesting, but how does it help with this?

> even if you "win", you have the problem of collecting.
On Android:

You can install ABP at a system level (https://adblockplus.org/android-install) or uBlock as a Firefox extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/android/addon/ublock-origin),

You can install Ghostery as a standalone browser (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghostery.a...) or as a Firefox extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/android/addon/ghostery/)

----

Embedded videos:

You can usually get them working with some whitelisting (which can be temporary or permanent). Though I personally often welcome the video blocking as a feature and impulse control tool (anecdotally, it seems to mostly break social media click-farming bullshit).
Yep, on logarithmic scale only.
Might work in some areas, but not the ones mentioned.
> Also, we've updated the FAQ to clarify that no one is allowed to submit job ads as stories to HN. That includes YC startups, since the job ads we let them post are not stories

That's right. The job ads YC companies post here are.. job ads. The job ads any other companies would post here "as stories" would be job ads too! Go figure.
Honestly, I'd say this is a rare example of a good non-clickbait article from Vox.
Chrome Extension for Replacing Hacker News Comments with 'Very Interesting'
I think because the actual procedure is included in the script, so "collection" takes place automatically in the code when it's processed.
Yeah but by establishing the playing field Uber can become dominant in the rest of the world. Taxi apps are subject to network effects so it's going to be very difficult for Lyft to supplant Uber in markets where they are dominant (e.g. the UK).
This will never be unbreakable because no complex system is unbreakable.

The reason contracts are messy is because they're a system that has vulnerabilities. Lawyers are just hackers with different tools and training.

So moving to another system, equally complex or dynamic, will not solve anything in the long run.

A system that must support contracts between humans would be dynamic enough to allow for vulnerabilities that will eventually be discovered.

In fact I find it laughable that these guys are trying to replace a legal system with a computer system. When computer systems get hacked all the time.
A while back I enjoyed going through this, also allows you to get a feel without futzing around with tools: http://clojurescriptkoans.com
If you read the article:

"A one month upgrade will run users $1.49, while a year-long upgrade costs $9.99."

I'm personally used to pay only one time for a game (except perhaps for MMOGs, where a subscription really makes sense).
How to Protect Your Android Phone from the Stagefright Bug
Thanks for the heads up, dang.
Yes it's outline, just because it is probably the less used css rule available for the scope. Probably the alternative could be box-shadow. Having to modify borders will probably result in breaking third parties CSS etc.. more troubles guess.

The code is already open-source, feel free to open issues, fork and PR also if you want to add new features, the door is open wide!
If we are being fair here neither does a traditional contract. The enforcement of a that contract falls to person (i.e Policeperson, Bailiff).

The benefit of etherscript in theory at least is that the wording of the contract is unambiguous, with the caveat that there may still be some areas where ambiguity is unavoidable. Which means that in the case of a website a digital bailiff could enforce the transfer. This is a clear benefit in some sense at least. How many times have you read about a court case and been bewildered about how someone could possibly be arguing over something that should be clear cut.

For contracts like a website domain transfer this sounds at least initially doable. What etherscript will have trouble handling is establishing what actually happened. It will undoubtedly be very good at specifying what the outcome of a sequence of events should be but as soon as it hits the real world the problem of establishing what that sequence of events was will still require some form of investigation and enforcement mechanism composed of people and thus there will still be an unavoidable amount of ambiguity there.
Jamf is the usual solution
> saw how Apple censors GPL software from App Store

GPL censors GPL software from App Store.
It's supposed to be unfair. This site exists in part to promote YC (and always has) and the staff can do whatever they want with it.
It strikes me the sheer amount of ignorance that some Americans esp. from the right exhibit when they debate anything that isn't sweatshop/plantation or winner-takes-all capitalism. They seem very oblivious to all the competing ideologies and economic theories out there and they always rush to judge anything that's contradictory to their economic worldview as "socialist" or "communist" like it's actually a bad thing but this should be the topic of another discussion.

Back to our subject, the pay scale that this business owner proposed is not actually socialist much less communist. It was just a communitarianist approach with centrist leaning on the right-left spectrum but these Limbaugh bots just freaked out like useful idiots that they are when they heard about this more egalitarian, considerate, humane compensation scheme barking at the business owner.

This is really pathetic and it's really disheartening to know about this silly reaction from these brainwashed people.

Finally, I must congratulate this brave guy on his ethics and I wish him all the luck even though I might have some reservations or concerns regarding infusing the workplace with political messages and using business ventures as political conduits to spread these messages about certain social causes but after all I support his decision of seeking a flatter pay scale and doing what he could to close the income inequality gap between the poor and the rich even on a micro-scale like what he did inside his organization.
their playground, their rules...
You're a doctor, a spin doctor to be more specific, right?
The example contract is very vague and seemingly pointless. The stated problem is 'if the buyer pays before 1st April, then they own the website'. Fair enough, but usually you'd just deal with this without any kind of contract in place. We don't need contracts for simple cases of 'buyer pays money, gets purchase.'

A contract would only be interesting in the example if it was structured as an option: The buyer has promised to pay for the item by 1st April, and in return, you have promised that you won't sell the item to someone else before then.

How would this be handled? How would be example contract react if you set 'WEBSITE_ADMIN' to someone else prior to the purchase? Does the example contract mean that WEBSITE_ADMIN cannot be altered by anyone else? What are the access controls to this storage slot WEBSITE_ADMIN? Does the seller lose write-access to it after the deal completes? Does the buyer gain read access? If not, what's to stop anyone changing this value and breaking the deal?
Personally I am in the same group as you: all ads are irrelevant and when I want something I go looking. I wonder if something like this could work to achieve a power balance: One or more of the ad blockers adds a service for ad tracking so I can see what vendors use what tactics. Non-advertisers could choose to register as such. Then the public can reward vendors based on their tactics.
Using Numba (you just adnotate the function with @numba.jit) speeds it up from 51 sec to 0.46 for me
Solitaire added ads to something that was previously free and ad free and added ads.

Spotify took something that previously cost money and made it free with ads.

There's also the fact that people can view Spotify as a ongoing service easily while people view MS solitaire as a component of a product. Normal people dislike when you turn their products into services needing ongoing payments
> Was it the "Yeah" that made the tone seem sarcastic?

I honestly wasn't sure, so I tried not to assume. Subtleties of tone are easily lost on the Internet; thank you for taking the time to clarify.

> I've only found mathematics really interesting within the past few years, realizing how useful it is for creative things, like making music and art, or understanding programming at a higher level.

While I am deeply in sympathy with this point of view, and agree with it to some extent, I think that it comes dangerously close to the monad-tutorial fallacy (https://byorgey.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/abstraction-intuiti...). As a teacher, I have four reactions to "why couldn't I have been taught this way?":

1. First and foremost, this is true. Course structure is often not set up to reward creativity and exploration, and that is a real shame. However …

2. I have heard students complain about not being taught in a way that I know is common pedagogical practice. That does not prove (they could just have been taught by bad teachers), but leads me to suspect, that sometimes students don't recognise (or don't want to see: "just show me the formulas!") alternate approaches when they are presented with them.

3. In many cases, the 'aha!' moment now couldn't have been an 'aha!' moment then; it is only because of the long struggle, and the additional learning and maturity, necessarily beginning with the confusion and uncertainty of yesterday, that everything can suddenly click today.

4. Even if I knew today the exact thing that would cause that 'aha!' moment for you, it is almost guaranteed that it wouldn't cause the same reaction for (many) others. The mission of a teacher is to serve the class as a whole; it is simply impossible, in terms of time and (let's be frank!) the teacher's knowledge, to explore for each student the application that will serve him or her best. This is not to say that some more applications and creative exploration wouldn't be welcome—they absolutely would—but more that, often, the best that can be done is to provide you with the basic tools that will allow you to explore and find the 'aha!' moment on your own, probably outside of the classroom.
> As I said previously. I think you should disclose your association with the defense/aerospace industry, and you should do that when you join a discussion. I would feel the same if you were employed in most any other industry, and commenting in a similar manner. You don't need to reveal your location or employer or anything like that; and frankly, you need to tolerate or at least expect some skepticism about your motives.

Yes, I am an engineer in defense and aerospace. I haven't hidden that fact on HN (as you saw) but I didn't mention it explicitly in this thread because I didn't think it was necessarily relevant. I'm very conscious of "appeal to authority" and I don't want to make it seem as though I am saying that I must be right because of what I do for a living. And I thought I had been fairly tolerant.

Edit: I should clarify "necessarily relevant with respect to the facts". I link to public sources where appropriate. Anyone can do so, no matter who they are. Strictly in this context, my affiliation doesn't matter.

> The .mil may or may not [probably won't] release info that could damage the project, and they won't release full performance specs, either; under the naive notion/excuse that potential adversaries can't get that kind of information.

Why make it easy for them? And yes, I'm very very aware that the F-35 is very controversial. But I see so much misinformation that sometimes I feel compelled to point out where/how the correct information can be found.