skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The former developers on Groovy are spending most of their time on their day jobs these days and they don't seem that interested in Groovy any more, except when they're promoting the existing version at conferences (and they tend to talk more about the fabricated number of downloads there anyway). Despite the grandiose plans of possibly improving Groovy with a proper meta-object protocol at some point in the distant future, Groovy has been in decline for a couple of years now and with less and less people using it, and those that do use it only using it for 30-liner test or build scripts, it's probably going to stay this way.

Such a missed opportunity.
I don't understand the second point. Do you think USG would turn to foreign psychologists for interrogation assistance?
What's "exceptional"? I've known many women in my career and many of them were mediocre. Some were in positions of authority and some weren't. Another commenter lists several "mediocre" women in the corporate and political world (and leaves out some big ones, like Meg Whitman). If you're talking about becoming a CEO, you have to be an "exceptional" man to get there too, in absolute terms.

I feel like the root erroneous assumption here is that an equal amount of people of all types are interested in the same things and that the only reason any group becomes more represented than another is that the others are getting alienated or funneled out somewhere along the way. That is a completely incorrect and invalid assumption. The fact that there are a lot more non-English-speakers in janitorial work in the US (when I worked as a janitor, I was 1 of 2 English speakers on the 12-person janitorial staff) doesn't necessarily mean the janitorial manager is biased against English speakers; it means that due to external considerations, like the fact that almost all other jobs require you to speak the native language, non-English-speakers are better suited for janitorial work, and therefore people do the logical thing, apply for work that they can do, and end up comprising a larger section of the application pool.

People make decisions based on social, cultural, and physical expectations of them, and there's not anything wrong with that. By and large, women do not have an interest in computer sciencey or entrepreneurial work. It's OK if a woman does, but it's also OK to note that most women don't. There's nothing we need to fix about it. Most women don't want to do it, and there's no reason to force them.

Why do you see fewer women becoming CEOs? Because fewer women want that kind of job and fewer women are qualified for that kind of job due to the biological realities of humanity that require women to take time out for pregnancy and child-rearing (sorry denialists, I didn't invent biology and choose that only women could bear and nurse children, so don't take it up with me), and the social and cultural expectations that have formed around these biological realities. In short, the serious applicant pool includes only a very small amount of women, so only a very small number of women obtain that position.
The phenomena of "stereotype threat" complicates this conclusion however: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat

When a member of a group is primed with a stereotype that their group underperforms at a task, they are more likely to underperform. So there could be a selection process biased against a group, and a selected member could be an above-average performer otherwise but, because of work environment, be underperforming.

Some universities work to remedy this through support groups or other practices aimed at under-represented minorities, and they appear to help students be more successful academically. On the other hand, there's the Hawthorne effect... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect
Electronically signable contract that lives in a single PHP file
I suspect the reason is this: Super Mario Bros constitutes a discrete Markov decision making framework with a reasonably sized state space. I.e. one can iterate through many possible future scenarios, similar to chess, on a modern computer.
That's crazy. This is censorship plain and simple.
People, most of whom clearly are not that good at math, are being really harsh on Paul Graham.

Graham is mostly right, but slightly incorrect. In particular, suppose group A has the distribution f(x) and B has the distribution g(x).

If f(x) and g(x) are shaped significantly differently past the cutoff, then mean(H(x-C)f(x)) and mean(H(x-c)g(x)) might not agree even though there is no bias by construction. (Here H(x) is a step function and C the cutoff).

However, there is an easy fix: compute the minima of the support of the distribution rather than mean. min(H(x-C)f(x)) = min(H(x-C)g(x)) = C.

In practice, measure the weakest male and weakest female to be accepted in your sample set, or some similar approximation.

I'm pretty sure this is a valid frequentist hypothesis test. I've got half a proof worked out on paper already. It depends very weakly (and non-parametrically) on f(x) and g(x), but it works in basically the exact way Graham wants it to. Every counterexample I can think of is really pathological. My next blog post will probably be a proof of this.

All this negativity is really an overreaction. I know it's fun to totally debunk someone on details, but these are mostly fixable details.
Could someone who read it more attnetively tell me, by this methodology,

-> If in retrospect YC finds any factor that its selected founders who turn into unicorns ($1b, $10b etc) have in common (more than its non-unicorn, also accepted founders)

-> Then by this method, could it conclude retroactively that it had been "biased" against that factor? (since it is present more than in its non-unicorns whom it had also admitted; i.e. in other words, those with the factor are more performant than "would be expected" without the bias against it?)

Or have I misunderstood?
Or hey, a new "information" branch.
And some sort of annotation/comment system for contracts, a la Rap Genius.
This is only a bias if the stereotype effect is stronger on measurements than in real life. If stereotype threat affects test performance and real performance the same way, then it means that the stereotyped group is truly inferior.

Do you have evidence that stereotype threat hurts test performance more than real performance?

(Of course, in a hypothetical world which only eliminated the stereotype, the group would cease to be inferior. I.e., the inferiority is based on context, and is not intrinsic.)
Even if it were a statistically appropriate sample size and female founders still out performed male founders it still wouldn't exlcude other likely explanations other than bias. What if the culture in venture capital is more willing to assist and mentor female founders leading to greater success? In academia there is a women are selected over equally qualified men 2:1 for tenure positions now [1]. It is not unreasonable to wonder if a similiar hand up is being given to female founders in terms of training, social network inclusion, and mentorship leading to greater success.

Alternatively, there may be a selection process in society that means only the most motivated women become entrepeneurs and so beat the average male entrepeneur.

[1]. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/08/1418878112.abst...
To be fair, CCC does have hacking content so its quite possible an automated filtering process would flag it.

That said, its sad how much cenorship we have on the Internet vs. 20 years ago.
But is there really a power dynamic? At least with respect to markets, it's much harder to say that there is.

The stories about monopolies of market power from the morgue of the Hearst newspapers ( and at varying times, all newspapers emulated the Hearst newspapers ) are mostly just-so stories. And then there are true stories, like Edison using patent law and legbreakers to dominate the film industry.
Yep. There's a great book called Sick Societies that does a great job dismantling the myth of the noble savage. PNG is one place discussed. IIRC, it also contains some cultures that highly value eating people you betray. The greater the betrayal (as in, you've befriended someone and act in their interests, then kill them), the higher the reward (respect or whatever).

Simply by agreeing on some basic human rights, or just being opposed to murder, is enough to show these societies are bad. Interference isn't intrinsically bad, and there's nothing unethical about putting an end to such atrocities. (It might be easy to fall into the trap of committing your own ethical violations while ending atrocities, but it's not required.)

The book does a good job of providing solid evidence of the harm these cultures inflict on people.
Chainsaws and handguns are probably other examples.

Fast food is another. (Alcohol, tobacco?)

Side note: I would argue that your patch of ice example is not nearly as good as the deer one. Skidding on a patch of ice and crashing is, IMO, simply driving too fast for conditions.
This lock starts to be a bottleneck when you want to scale the Linux TCP stack over a large number of cores (8+). This patch could be an huge improvement.

Because of the issues that this lock leads to, I had to implement an user-space, lock-less, TCP/IP stack for my Master's thesis, last year:

https://github.com/raphaelj/rusty

https://github.com/RaphaelJ/master-thesis/raw/master/thesis....
I was also contemplating windshield wiper motor and solar panel. My tests showed I needed at least 30 watt panel, which was too cumbersome in a kayak. So my collapsible windmill equals 24*30 = 720 Watt hours of solar energy.

I had 10 liter can and I needed 3 liters/day, so I started the windmill only twice per week.
You can only use other criteria, when the others differ. For the same size and same price order, what possible argument can be made to fill the last arriving order first and still claim a fair market? At some point, latency always matters. If you randomize so latency doesn't matter, you just create a system where those with more capital get more orders. However you want to "fix" it, you're still going to be making a system that isn't fair to someone. Most people would agree that waiting in line is the most fair option IMHO, and that's proven out by normal human behavior in the day to day world.
They put a very specific list of talks that they do not approve - it does seem that they spent some time going through the content that CCC wanted to share through this app before finally rejecting it.
"Thanks" is not being used to imply thankfulness in that sentence. Synonyms here would be "because of" or "due to".
Disable adblocker and it loads with an 'answer a survey question' to allow full access.
i always find less is more with programming.
A bit of a nitpick, but Christianity and Judaism Islam are middle eastern belief systems. They also heavily disrupted western thought for nearly two millennia. But they are not endemic of the west, but an imposition, albeit, now voluntary, but with also a terrible and violent history against the native western traditions.
Wouldn't the weakest male and weakest female founders be underperforming more due to individual factors than bias?

Maybe a mean of the lower quartile would remove some the the noise.
Because Mercedes isn't making absurd claims about autopilot systems and because "everyone knows" that innovation only comes from Silicon Valley. OK, that was a bit snarky but assistive driving systems, however useful and safety-enhancing, don't get people all wide-eyed and excited the way promises of autonomy in "just five years" does.
That isn't what the article is saying. It argues that the lack of ideological diversity in social sciences leads to less scrutiny of conventional wisdom. Which it claims is partially responsible for the field's trouble reproducing the results of published research.

[edit] I'm just paraphrasing the argument of the article, which I don't necessarily agree with.
Right-click -> Inspect Element -> Delete modal DOM element -> click on their print button -> open preview in PDF viewer.
Coal is the largest source of electricity in the United States. It will take decades to replace it on the most optimistic predictions (how long to build Natural Gas or Nuclear plants? How long to solve the Solar/Wind peak capacity problems?). So what happens when it's illegal to mine coal? The only non-disastrous solution is that we import it from countries that don't have the ban, which is relatively pointless--it would probably cause a short time price jump, with all the attendant disruption, and no significant long-term benefits.

Put that way, your solution sounds a lot better than I thought, but somehow I doubt that's what you mean.

I think we should be doing a lot to move away from coal. A 50 year runway to eliminate coal burning sounds conceivable.

But your original post sounds like an environmentalist Donald Trump speaking--no actual analysis of anything, just knee-jerk "it oughta be illegal!!!" If what you meant all along was a decades long reduction in coal to zero, you did a tremendous job of attacking your own credibility.

P.S. Your citation of the perfect solution fallacy is off the mark. I was not arguing that it would be good, but not good enough. Rather, I was implying that it would be actively bad. China uses much more coal than us, as a proportion of their electric generation. If the US were to drastically drive up its electric prices, some proportion of industry would move overseas. The net effect might be increased greenhouse gas emissions, and certainly increased non-greenhouse pollutants. That's above and beyond the negative effects on the US economy.
The "thanks" threw me for a second too, but like placeybordeaux, I believe it's being used in a merely causal sense. E.g. "Thanks to all the rain we’ve been having this summer the grass and dirt outside are often muddy."
But there is a difference between what people say and what they do. Spending is closer to "do". If social interaction rewarded honesty it would be different, but social interaction does not reward honesty.
If candidates from group A perform more strongly on average than those from group B there are other possible causes than bias in the selection process itself. For instance, members of group A may only apply at a higher level of self-assessment for how likely they are to succeed than those in group B. The reason for this could be opportunity cost not present for group B, overconfidence or lack of underconference in group B or underconference or lack of overconfidence in group A.
Your previous reading was correct.
We've seen coal go up in price by more than 50%, and it didn't hammer the industry. For example, global coal prices basically doubled from 2003-2007. Coal consumption did not plunge during that time, China kept buying more of it at higher prices (coal at 2x the current prices, is still a cheap energy source if you don't properly force in environmental costs). It wasn't until fracking made huge amounts of natural gas available, that the US coal industry began to sink (in tandem with the Obama Admin targeting coal).

More expensive coal can help speed the process, I certainly agree with that. The question is, can you buy enough coal mines around the world to crash the coal industry in that respect, and out-pace the amount of new coal supply other miners can bring to the market seeking higher profits. I seriously doubt it, I'd argue there's far too much coal.

Politically you'd have to basically use the Obama Admin tactics, globally, to hit the coal industry, while also removing as many mines as possible. It's an incredibly expensive, risky proposition (and good luck getting everyone to sign on to it) - when we'd be far better off continuing to improve alt energy, and building nuclear plants. China for example isn't going to chop their own legs off to placate climate concerns, they're going to keep using coal until they can gradually diversify to other sources like nuclear, wind and solar.
This presupposes that we should not accept unequal representation among groups. I don't believe that, and I don't think it's an implicit Western value. People should be allowed to flourish according to their natural advantages. The value is to try not to make an early judgment and exclude people based on assumptions about their group's capability, whether that exclusion is based on the group's perceived disadvantage or advantage. The idea is that the individual shouldn't be held accountable for things he had nothing to do with, and shouldn't be assumed to be automatically compliant with stereotypes. I don't see a need to start throttling groups that are doing "too well".
The thing is, this isn't censorship "on the internet" but on their private, closed platform that people choose to be a part of.
> As such, the field seems to have trouble reproducing the results of published research.

I'm skeptical that ideological diversity or lack thereof is at the root of this, since you see it in a lot of "soft science" disciplines of varying political inclinations. Political science, psychology, and economics have fairly different distributions of political viewpoints, and yet none of those fields has a strong track record of reproducibility.
New Video Player App for Mac – Aurora Player Is an Unique Application on the Mac
Back during Twitch Plays Pokemon, someone wrote a little script that suppressed other people's commands from appearing in the chat. That seems to be badly needed for this: because of the delay it is really important to pay attention to the bot's "Winning Command" announcements in chat
The effect would result in the same situation, but the cause is much different.
More or less, it really helps if it's the right length (as posted near here). An easy way to make one is to calculate 246/Frequency for a 1/4 wave antenna. So around the two meter / 144 Mhz ham band: 246/144=1.5 feet. The example in the video he's at ~440 Mhz so : 246 / 440 = 0.6 feet ~6 1/2 inches. You can make a "ground plane antenna" with a connector and coat hanger wire that will improve both the reception and transmission. At 50 Mhz where lots of doorbell items are it would be 246/50: ~5 feet of wire. In which case you can go for 1/8 wave length, about 2' 7'.

Somewhere in the posts is a suggestion to build a lowpass filter and that will work. But the Pi puts off some pretty messy spectrum splatter, so before you build a good antenna take a few mins and build a narrow passband filter. It cuts the splatter below (like a lowpass) and above (like a highpass) your chosen frequency.

Better yet, go to QRZ.com and look up a ham in your area to help you out. We have parts in our vast inventory of supplies (aka junk box) to help you out.
"Let's get another group of beginners in to see what they can do... and fire the experts."

What a thing to say.
Text is syndicated here

http://eaglefordtexas.com/news/id/154927/inside-fracking-che...

Images can be viewed in Chrome devtools (Resources tab) or Tools > Page Info > Media in Firefox.
Suppose the cutoff for men is C but for women is C+K. Then the weakest man can be expected to have quality C+epsilon, while the weakest woman will have quality C+K+epsilon.

Here epsilon is how close a typical candidate will be to the cutoff, and is mainly a function of the sample size. I don't know the behavior of epsilon off the top of my head.
They aren't really ready for use. FHIR isn't really ready for use. While it's version 1.0.2, there's a lot of functionality lacking; for example you can't send back orders. And it seems like they have frequent breaking changes at this point. I've also yet to hear of anyone actually getting permission and using the open Epic FHIR apis in production.

Calling it a joke is probably too harsh though. It just isn't the panacea that PR makes it out to be.
You could generate 100% "certainty" about the results of a coin toss if you threw everyone who didn't think it would come up heads out of the room. If you can't convince someone who doesn't already agree, you shouldn't be allowed to claim knowledge, only opinion. (Note: This doesn't mean you aren't right, just that our social mechanism of truth-finding shouldn't trust you implicitly.)
Apple Publish the New Mac App Turn Off the Lights for Desktop Online
The problem with retaining conservatives in academia is that they can make too much money from super pacs, crazy billionaires, telecom companies that want you to pay a lot for crappy DSL, etc.
This logic is similar to that of Larry Summers in his remarks about diversity in science and engineering, http://www.harvard.edu/president/speeches/summers_2005/nber.....
> I'm telling you that you can't know anything or say something is rational or irrational with conventions of logic.

Stawman, that point is not in dispute.

> but you are coming from a worldview that doesn't allow for laws (boo! inconsistency!).

No I'm not. Your notion that materialism doesn't allow logic is simply wrong. You don't know what materialism is and I'm tired of repeating myself on that point why you continue to skirt the issue and ignore that.

> This is where materialists bow out because they don't want to dig too deeply into their presuppositions.

No, they bow out because you're clearly irrational and unable to engage in meaningful conversation because you don't address points being made to you. You just ignore them and keep saying the same non-sense that's being challenged.
Modern cars are styled to be aggressive because that's what sells. The Google car is almost certainly designed to look harmless, because they want people to be comfortable riding in it. My late grandmother, for instance, refused to buy a car that had an angry 'face' (i.e. the shape of the headlights).
Wind may blow 24 hours. And some places are less windy than others.
I'm not sure I agree either, I was just summarizing what I thought was the thesis of the article.
Google's response:

"Our Google Play policies (specifically clause 4.4) have long prohibited apps that interfere with other apps (such as by altering their functionality, or removing their way of making money). We apply this policy uniformly — and Android developers strongly support it. All apps must comply with these policies and there’s over 200 privacy apps available in Google Play that do."

https://theintercept.com/2015/06/23/google-disconnect-antitr...
If Africa is anything like the Philippines, it was ruled by "witch doctors", but that was before exposure to Europeans (i.e. 400 years ago). Perhaps esaym just meant a really long time ago. In the last 50 years the only place you'll find which doctors is out in the more remote rural areas.
Why is "competitors" a dirty word?
A simple, better presentation library for HTML`
Why are you using biased mathematics? If statistics and the scientific method (the tools through which dead white men continue to colonize) give us obviously problematic results, we should abandon them in favor of a method of inquiry that promotes social justice.
Whilst you are correct in that AmigaOS didn't implement memory protection, it's possible to argue that wasn't by design.

The original design for AmigaOS was known as CAOS. The CAOS design included resource tracking, which I believe is a useful feature when it comes to implementing memory protection.

If I remember correctly what ended up happening was the microkernel for CAOS was developed in-house (Exec), but contractors were being paid to develop the rest of the OS, and they disagreed with the design decisions of CAOS and wanted to make it more Unix-like. Once the Amiga team realised the contractors had wasted time developing something different from what they intended, they sought out an alternative solution to replace the user-space side of the OS. As a result they contracted a different team to rework an OS called TripOS to use the Exec microkernel (that was originally intended for CAOS), which then became the AmigaOS that Amiga users know.

You can read a bit more here:

http://www.amigahistory.plus.com/caos.html
If Sweeden became a US state