Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
matroosberg
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
5 ms
·
1.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
There are a couple more necessary requirements for surveillance not to be a problem: A guarantee that the government will stay good (and not for example turn on minorities) and competency to keep accumulated safe from malicious parties come
2.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
Ad A) It's merely a list of extinct languages, an incomplete at that since we cannot possibly know all languages that were spoken 3000 years ago. So it does not even give you a rate at which languages go extinct. But, yes, as we see mo
3.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
What evidence do you have to support your claim? I think it is much more likely that we will have a small number of lingua francas (right now English, Spanish and Mandarin are the top three spoken languages and serve as the lingua franca in
4.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
It almost certainly is the most habitable planet for life as we know it today because we and our environment co-evolved to match the conditions. Just because 2/3 of the planet (not sure how you arrived at the number / what parts a
5.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
Thanks for the correction.
6.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
> The "complete unknown" is not actually unknown. [...] The exact details of a relationship post-Brexit are impossible to know. I'm confused. Do you agree or disagree with zb that the referendum pitted a well known against
7.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
Are you asking how I would do the referendum? Certainly not with a 16 page manifesto and basically asking "Wanna leave the EU?" It should have included considerations what would happen with Northern Ireland, Scotland and Gibraltar
8.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
Labeling the referendum as dumb is IMHO accurate, not because of the outcome, but because of the way it was done. It takes an extremely complex matter and puts it into an simple yes no questions without discussing the consequences. What doe
9.
▲
by
matroosberg
10y ago
You claim many reasons, but offer only one: Innovating without interference from the EU. This is however far from reality. The UK even once it leaves for real, will still be affected by EU regulations, but now without being able to directly
10.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
React does not require you to use JSX. Writing views with React.DOM is actually a quite nice alternative. This article gives an explanation: https://www.packtpub.com/books/content/using-reactjs-without... However,
11.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
It looks like a nice project, but I wonder about the use case. It is limited to HTML output and usage from Rust. Hence, limiting the projects where it can be used. HTML syntax has its problems, but when you work with the web, you have to kn
12.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
Are you referring to Sivak's report[1]? The problem there is that it compares average trips and not trips where car vs plane is actually an option, according to the ThinkProgress article [2]. I have not read the report itself and I don
13.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
Completely dominant in finance? Do you have a source for that claim?
14.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
Prof. Tao himself links to the wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_%28logic%29 which uses this as an example for Common Logic.
15.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
These are not simulating a Turing Machine, they are computationally equivalent to a Turing Machine (for practical purposes). I am adding the practical purposes disclaimer because an x86 has limited memory which makes it actually just comput
16.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
How is that clear? Where is the data that backs up your claim? The studies cited in http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/02/having-a... certainly point the other direction.
17.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
No, it did not just look at one side of the equation. "We enrolled 677 case participants that had been shot in an assault and 684 population-based control participants within Philadelphia, PA, from 2003 to 2006. We adjusted odds ratios
18.
▲
by
matroosberg
11y ago
Yes, it is unreasonable to want a gun for this situation because you only escalate the situation with a gun present. Carrying a gun increases your risk to get shot: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a