jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
> Thanks!

You're welcome.

> Yes, formatting messaged up.

Do you mean "messed up"? I can't make sense of "messaged up" but I'm guessing it doesn't matter.

> I did read your article ...

I didn't write it, so it's not really "my" article.

> ... I felt that it buckets all hacks together as an unnecessary evil in education.

I think in this case and this context, "hack" refers to "doing something a quick and dirty way without necessarily knowing how or why it works."

> I don't ever remember a case where I was only taught the hack, for example. We learn it the long way and then the teacher/lecturer might show us a quick version in passing. Is this not the case all of the time?

Then you are lucky, and no, it's not the case all the time. There are many cases of students being taught "Tricks" to get a result without them having any real understanding of what's going on. You don't need to spend very long talking to students about how they're solving exam problems to realise that in many (but not all!) cases they're just applying hacks, tricks, and processes without knowing why they work.
The quote at the beginning of the article is right:

> The one reality that you can never change is that a higher-priced asset will produce a lower return than a lower-priced asset. You can't have your cake and eat it. You can enjoy it now, or you can enjoy it steadily in the distant future, but not both – and the price we pay for having this market go higher and higher is a lower 10-year return from the peak.

With a bit more mathematical rigor: For each of us there will be only one future. In that future, each asset -- company, property, etc. -- will earn a finite cash flow yield. If we pay more for that future cash flow now, our rate of return will be lower in the future.
Workers in the public sector are still workers, and can be mistreated by management. They can be underpaid, be forced into dangerous workplace conditions, etc.
Grassland also sequesters CO2 - more than forests, by some measures. I'd be more interested in how much methane all these new ruminants were going to produce.
> in fact, I would have gone a step further and made integer division return fractions rather than floats by default, as well

This was decided against in Python:

> ABC had two types of numbers at run time; exact numbers which were represented as arbitrary precision rational numbers and approximate numbers which were represented as binary floating point with extended exponent range. The rational numbers didn’t pan out in my view. (Anecdote: I tried to compute my taxes once using ABC. The program, which seemed fairly straightforward, was taking way too long to compute a few simple numbers. Upon investigation it turned out that it was doing arithmetic on numers with thousands of digits of precision, which were to be rounded to guilders and cents for printing.)

https://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/02/early-language-d...
Every time I hear this I wish they would say US Internet.
Ouch. Don't chain yourself to a sinking ship.
That's herd immunity.

Individual immunity is different.
I don't object to the term. I think any thing that fills in the gap that implies value will lead to the same conclusion. I don't think that's surprising since the evidence is really strong in favour of that conclusion: arbitrary human life has very little value. It is certainly true that almost all individuals behave in a manner consistent with this being true, at least.

I personally believe it is nearer zero, but it is clearly less valuable than whatever value most individuals ascribe to ten hundred dollar bills.
This is a business opportunity to provide services at a minimal cost for people. Say 1$ per month per service.

Email - 1$

Calendar - 1$

Document Collab - 1$

Each addon a calculated minimalist approach to each. I still recall what gmail was when it was invite only back in the early aughts. I would still utilize that gmail client. I do NOT need gmail as it is today. And I would certainly pay 1$ per month for that service.

(E)
For a minimal and basic interface, along with a low cost, I and certainly others that I know who are tech illiterate, would pay that low cost for simplicity + privacy.
A random Q&A page is not "a new definition" as an universal standard. Also, quoting from that page today https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease...

> 'Herd immunity', also known as 'population immunity', is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection. WHO supports achieving 'herd immunity' through vaccination, not by allowing a disease to spread through any segment of the population, as this would result in unnecessary cases and deaths.
Linode has a fixed price strategy and focused on being a VPS provider.
I wonder if these companies like IRI use employee social media profiles in their research.
Research & prop trading firm | Zug/Zurich | Full time | On site (Visa sponsor)

We apply ML to algotrading. We plan to use the proceeds to fund a fundamental AI research lab. Our primary goal is making progress toward AGI.
Over the last two years, we turned 5 digits into 9 digits, trading a volume of around 1-4B per day. We operate as a prop trading firm of 7 people, we are restructuring our operations and moving to Zug. The short term priorities are growing the trading team and starting the research operation.

We look for the following roles:

- Engineer (trading side): Design, implement and maintain the next version of our trading engine. Experience with market micro structure, writing robust code and dealing unreliable APIs required.

- Engineer (ML side): Automate and maintain our current trading models. Improve retraining, automated deployment and capital allocation systems.

Compensation: 200-300k, bonus scheme with reinvestment in the fund, 1-3% options with 4y vesting.
To apply, email me at: not underscore a underscore cat at fastmail dot com.

Keywords:
Trading side: cryptocurrency bitcoin ethereum machine learning deep learning algotrading market making high frequency trading limit orderbook liquidity provision market microstructure binance okex ftx python pytorch pandas numpy ssh aws typescript postgresql parquet pycharms numba rust backtest uniswap-v3 automated market maker liquidity pool arbitrage yield farming funding arbitrage prop trading hedge fund
Research side: probabilistic programming simulation generative models learning-to-learn inference modelling data augmentation causality self-play GANs transformers bayesian-inference
Marine plywood (ie, epoxy resin) if he has any sense. Well tested in these types of confined living applications, too. Resists the thermal cycling and condensation likely to be found in this application.
I wonder though, even if you could 'transfer' your brain to software, there would be a 'switch', where you'll get rid of your body in the process. Then the (software) copy will start being you.

Then when you die / kill the physical self - the you you dies. The one you are now.

Would it actually make a difference to know that there's another you out there that didn't die? It's just a comforting feeling that you're not really gone, and that your mind keeps "living". I'm just not sure if it's much more comforting than believing in reincarnation or that your soul goes to heaven in my opinion.
Uh, thanks?

suspects this is in the class of Things To Be Careful What You Wish For
Take a look at RESTAS, I think it has some good ideas, and doesn't try to force you to do too many things in certain ways, unlike many other CL web frameworks: http://restas.lisper.ru/en/
No need to back to the 70s, either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulbuddin_Hekmatyar
Yup. It gave me a nice intro to formal systems / number theory iirc. Intro only though, and it was only a small part of the book.
Mensa seems to be for people who are satisfied being intelligent rather than using it.
Install Ubuntu Minimal and just download what you need. You'll get the popularity of Debian (with all those packages) and a fast system (you can install any WM and such).
And the advantage wouldn't be that big. Especially compared to co-locating.
I think that's the other side of the coin - which the puzzle sort of glosses over. Costs are going to go up wildly, mainly due to increased health care costs and an ageing population. Without either capping medicare or increasing the retirement age, you have to slash a whole bunch of stuff to make up an equivalent amount.
After wasting 6 years living in the peninsula and south bay, mainly because I was afraid of the commute (I still work in Santa Clara), I moved up to SF a couple months ago. Best decision I've made in recent memory.

I'm lucky in that my work schedule is flexible, so I get to/from the office in 35-45 minutes. Much better than the 2-hour train/light rail commute would be.

I agree with one of the other posters that the best places to hang out seem to be in and around the Tenderloin, Nob Hill, etc. I do enjoy the Mission as well, but that's a little farther for me, and I prefer to walk places when I can. SoMa is kinda eh, North Beach is a wasteland, Marina... not so much.
I'm a fan of swagger, especially because it's not tied to one language and helps the developer to design his API in an easy way. The tools provided for describing your API using the Swagger spec is really fascinating.

This tries to standardize API transports, which doesn't make a sense to me, because there is no need for that. If you are going to develop an API with (open) SDK clients that support consuming your services, then I don't need to care for your API transport to be written in JSON-API. Especially making transports human readable appears to be a waste of ressources in my eyes. Those API's are meant to be consumed by machines and debugging can and should be done with tools, not by enforcing a standard.
The delay was actually because the Range hadn't approved the Flight Termination System on board F9. The Range is really not the gatekeeper for orbit, their job is to protect the public and ensure that the rocket doesn't harm the uninvolved public. Thus the sea lane closures, airspace clearance, clearing of the immediate area, and FTS in case the rocket deviates from it's proper course (within margins, of course).
There is a Posca with a brush tip and good ink flow.
The easiest to find is the Pentel, but does not flow that fast so you'd have to adjust the speed. So it might not be that easy, and require some experimentation...
There is tremendous value in poster session. Most data is prepublication, and getting candid 1 on 1 discussion with others in the field, including potential reviewers, is great. Also, the networking is valuable- many next jobs start in Poster session discussions. And also wandering through rows of posters and having the investigator walk you through the study us a great way to broaden knowledge. In my day some meeting used to have beer/wine at poster sessions.
Good stuff.
Yeah, sadly I couldn't figure out how to not make it happen. The SSO OAuth providers tend to work better.

If you mark it as "Not spam" it will fix it on a case by case basis.
Technology seems to be made for more technically inclined subjects before being brought to other areas.

For example, when I was an undergrad, math and CS subjects had great coverage on the internet (great wikipedia articles, downloadable pdfs), whereas Biology was much more spotty.
It also makes your pay cheaper, your job cheaper (easier to get rid of) and your mortgage more expensive (relative).

Yay!
I assume you meant (emphasized to highlight correction).

> One might just as easily shout out a hypothesis that non-religious people are more likely to make informed decisions based on actual data and hence stick to products that have been verified to work, whereas religious people categorize everything simply by whatever it says on label regardless of reality and are more likely to put blind faith in everyday decisions.

However, I think this is counteracted by this part of the data (emphasis mine):

> Researchers discovered that those participants who wrote about their religion prior to the shopping experience were less likely to pick national brands when it came to products linked to appearance or self-expression — specifically, products which reflected status, such as fashion accessories and items of clothing.

If I understand correctly, this means that the religious and non-religious went with name brands equally often when the products were utilitarian (e.g. batteries and pain reliever medications) but the non-religious were more likely to pick famous brands when the products had a strong cultural signaling functions (e.g. sunglasses and fashion accessories).

Seeing as that signaling group loyalties is widely understood to be the (evolutionary) purpose of many, many human actions, is it that surprising that people already signaling loyalties in one area (religion) are less likely to be inclined to signal loyalties in another (cultural/fashion/political)? This is hardly an endorsement of theism or atheism, just a fact of human nature.
That is after the teenage kid from New York made $130,000 by converting black iPhone 4s to white !
on civil suits, here's a post from Prison Planet describing a couple: one from 2008, and one that by Rutherford Institute on behalf of pilots. http://www.infowars.com/tsa-hit-with-lawsuits-as-revolt-expl...
You're getting bent out of shape about a pretty straightforward observation about human nature.

(1) Many people have a pretty strong drive to affiliate themselves to things. Humans are a social species.

(2) One of the primary functions of organized religion is to affiliate people to each other. I'm Catholic and we're not even remotely circumspect about this.

(3) If you have a prior strong affiliation, you've naturally blunted your desire to affiliate to other things.

(4) Whether you're religious or not, you will naturally affiliate to brands, products, music, culture, clubs, hobbies, and anything else, because you're wired in ways that create emergent grouping behavior.

They'd probably have gotten the same results comparing ACLU volunteers or skate park enthusiasts to the general population of nonreligious people.
This is pretty interesting. There are a lot of interesting projects and data analysis that come from analyzing tweets but the price tag seems far beyond what any of these would be willing to pay.

Previously some serious time would be spent scraping content from the feeds but given that it's only 2% of the content and would take months (at least) to gather a significant amount makes it less than ideal. Although I would assume for a vast majority of cases, months are worth less than $360k.
I would generally agree if we never just went through a major crisis and saw the failings of current processes. One of the things that was made explicitly clear, is that for some firms that are too large, the bankruptcy proceedings don't really work like they should.

I do think, however, that if Google or Amazon failed there are some elements that would stay up - but it's more than just those elements.

It's the little things, like email for 200million people disappearing overnight. I can't even imagine the amounts of things that would be lost (receipts from sales, tax information, customer data, invoices, legal contracts, etc.). Much less just a major communication channel going dark. That alone would cause a dip in GDP (in my opinion).

Might be difficult to foresee, but so was the banking crisis.
2 micromorts does not mean 2 separate risks, each of which has a 1 in 1 million chance of killing you. It means a single risk that has a 1 in 500 thousand chance of killing you. Similarly, it would be absurd to define 1 mort as the combination of 1 million separate risks, each of which has a 1 in 1 million chance of killing you. Whether 1 mort is guaranteed death or 1 - 1/e chance of death (my previous mention of it being 1/e was mistaken) is a property of how we define the unit to work, not a property of how correlated 1 million separate risks happen to be. Definitions that give answers other than 1 - 1/e or 1 don't make any sense.

> mathematically 1/e would only be an approximation anyway

If we're going with the definition that treats micromorts as independent, then it would make sense to define a mort as exactly a 1 - 1/e chance of death, and a micromort as a 1 - e^(-10^(-6)) chance of death, rather than a 10^-6 chance of death, but the difference is smaller than the degree of risk that we can measure or care about, so the difference is inconsequential, and it would still make sense to describe a micromort as a 10^-6 chance of death.
Author of blog post here: It's true, I haven't done a good job of mentioning the benefits that you get in return for the complexity of C++, especially as far as value semantics is concerned. Thanks for setting that right.
Yes but a fair insurance would be the exact price of the risk leveled among insured, plus a small processing fee. There should be not one penny left for luxurious offices or prestigious ads or art mecenat.

Lottery pleasure is empty. Play poker with friends, you may loose money but at least you get friends.

The problem pointed in Kahneman book is that we are irrational, and (AND) it's usually the less irrational among us who win.
Back in late 1990s and early 2000s, enterprises were much more dependent on MSFT than today. Windows machines were in server rooms, Windows machines were on desktops, Exchange was everywhere.... Companies really depended on Microsoft: they had the entire stack.

Fast forward to 2013 ... what do you see? Did Ballmer really improve Microsoft position in enterprise comparing to Oracle and other competitors?
Perhaps. I was merely trying to be precise with my answer so that I wouldn't say something silly (expecting the exact same number of deaths). I wasn't trying to be bitchy, though I fear it came off that way.
I think you mean 1-1/e (~= 1 - (1-10^-6)^(10^6)). But yes, the idea that you can just divide a statistic sampled over thousands of events linearly to get a meaningful statistic for one occurrence of the event is ridiculous.
It's ok. I'm just a paid government shill that's steering you towards the truth. Trust me. <sleazy smile/>

The fantasy is not that this couldn't happen or is not happening. The fantasy is that if such a program were initiated that it would remain within the 'ethical' boundaries that he specified.

It's like saying that if we create a national Internet filter to block known child porn URLs that the mechanisms to do this would be used only for blocking child porn. The reality is that people would be busting down the door to knock their favourite-thing-to-hate off of the Internet.
It's also sad that people are saddened by others not like them. The world would be a lot nicer if we accepted, instead of being saddened.
Consider Facebook's valuation and then consider how they actually make money. Do they even make money outside of advertising, and is that advertising over valued? How many advertisers have already pulled out of Facebook ads due to ineffectiveness?

A lot of these companies are valued solely on the number of users, and little to due with anything else. Maybe someday they will spin it and turn all those users into profit, that seems to be the dream. It's not always a viable reality.
I would say veto the entire bill until people stop doing this. Make it a matter of policy.
what a time to be alive. i wonder if i can customize my ride by having an Arnold look-alike yell "get in the choppa" as i'm boarding it?
I can't say I disagree with such sentiments, but over time I've ran into a few issues (features and performance improvements) which where only addressed in Python 3. This is reason enough to try working with Python 3.
Why does the UK still have the house of the Lords? The elites don't control enough of the government?
Thank you for sharing. You are absolutely right. I suspect that most of us live in a state of imbalance even if it doesn't appear that way from the outside. We typically neglect some aspect of our lives while giving other aspects more attention.

You will do it again at some point and that is OK. You will have a better sense of what is important to you and act accordingly.
drop me a line - my email is in my profile.
Isn't that illegal in China? Or not? Are there any repercussions if you get caught evading in one way or another their national firewall?
Not definitive but at least the debt wiped out in the GFC including what is called "the lost decade". So at least quite a bit.
We've been getting questions about this so I'm going to write a detailed explanation.

All: if there is any question I haven't answered, please let me know - but please read this comment and its cousins (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26714003 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26713701) first, to make sure that it's truly unanswered.

---

There was a massive thread about this a couple weeks ago:

Richard Stallman is coming back to the board of the FSF - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535224 - March 2021 (854 comments)

Since then, there have been over 100 follow-up submissions. (Not a typo! Over 100 submissions in just two weeks.) I've posted a list of the larger threads below. If you click through those links, you'll see that most have been flagged. They were flagged by users, not moderators.

From a moderation point of view, the issue isn't Stallman—the issue is repetition. Curiosity withers under repetition (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...) and flamewar burns it to a crisp.

Stallman is on topic for HN, obviously. But endless flamewar is off topic, and the latter trumps the former. In a situation like this, we usually wait for Significant New Information (SNI) to show up. Has there been SNI since https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26535224? I haven't seen it.

I wouldn't mind turning off flags on another large discussion about this, since the last one was 2 weeks ago and there is obviously an appetite for it (among some HN users) in addition to aversion to it (among others). Aversion has been having its way lately, so we could give appetite a chance. However, it would require an article that is capable of supporting a more substantive discussion. In particular, it would have to be something other than a "yay RMS" or a "boo RMS".

There's another issue too: if we turn off the flags on a Yay or a Boo, people will accuse us of being Yayers or Booers, and generally we prefer not to release the hounds of hell on ourselves. People accuse us of that anyway; imagine what they'd do with a big fat juicy data point.
Generally, is my view too. They're unambiguous about their views and will plainly mention their ideological angles -- free market, woo!

But they're also willing to explore other sides, and even lean or agree with them. They occasionally create a false dichotomy, but they're usually (ironically) fair and balanced, or at least attempt to be.
In the past year, I realized that any routine meeting, no matter how informal or "agile", needs predictability, even if it's just starting the "serious time" 5 minutes after the hour by stating the date and ending the call with a predictable sign-off. I feel like this duty should fall in the Project Manager, but some have balked at me that it sounds "stiff" to deliver, so I take this responsibility.

I used to stress about standups ("Will the next 15 minutes be focused on that outstanding Defect on my plate?"), but this added etiquette has helped things go smoothly (or at least I think so... and most colleagues tell me they agree)
I also hope to never go back to the way it was before. But I still think it is important to meet face to face every once in a while.

Maybe I’m just old/old-school.