skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's a flaw right in the assumptions here: "(c) the groups of applicants you're looking at have roughly equal distribution of ability."

Oh. See, the problem is that if an application process is biased, and applicants perceive that bias, then those against whom it is biased will be dissuaded from applying unless they far exceed the required standards. Whereas those towards whom the process is biased will be more likely to apply, even if they are marginally qualified, because they expect to benefit from the bias.

So that means that if you do have a biased process, there's a good chance it doesn't meet criterion c - applicants in the different groups between which its bias discriminates are not equal in ability. So your test might verify a lack of bias, when there is in fact bias present.

You can't verify a lack of bias just by looking at the outcomes of successful applicants - you need to look at the outcomes for unsuccessful applicants too, to determine whether your applicant pools really do meet criterion c. Or you could look at the outcomes for nonapplicants, but that's clearly a much harder problem.
Unfortunately I think this is a problem with many of his essays. They often present a very specific argument with reservations, which makes the argument very hard to disagree with since you have to argue relevance which requires a lot more insight. It's therefor taken as truth by the readers, even if the original argument don't support their conclusion. In general I think they should be seen as opinion pieces rather essays. I have a hard time seeing many of them being up to e.g. basic university standard.
What was the input type? PNG? If so, that means that a lot of the size gain is due to the fact that PNG can compress based on similarities between rows, while GZIP on the CSS is only compressing in the horizontal direction.
Show HN: Search for Elixir and Erlang Packages in Alfred
Hey, millions of dollars can always help. It will be in my HOWTO for successful FOSS if I ever write one. :)

I think the simple architecture is their main benefit, though. They only put in complexity where the most benefit. Then they reused NetBSD's work. A common cheat.
You're beating a straw man. He said in some circumstances.
It shouldn't be possible for a prosecutor to know that a defendant is innocent and simultaneously be confident that they have a solid case that can result in a guilty verdict.

A prosecutor trying to optimize for conviction rates will still refrain from prosecuting people when he doesn't have a good case. It's just based on the quality of the case, not the presumed guilt or innocence of the accused.
Errata:

Replace

Type I Error: We reject the null
hypothesis when it is true, e.g., we
conclude bias when there is none.

Type II Error: We fail to reject (i.e.,
we accept) the null hypothesis when it is
false.

with

Type I Error: We reject the null
hypothesis when it is true; e.g., we
conclude bias when there is none.

Type II Error: We fail to reject (i.e.,
we accept) the null hypothesis when it is
false; e.g., we conclude there is no bias
when there is.

Replace

For a random number, how about starting
with a 32 bit integer, with appropriately
long precision arithmetic multiply by
5^15, add 1, take modulo 2^47, and scale
as we want?

with

For a random number, how about starting
with a 32 bit integer, with appropriately
long precision arithmetic multiply by
5^15, add 1, take modulo 2^47, take the
resulting integer, scale as we want for
stirring our pot, and use that integer as
the start of another random number?

Replace

Else First Round looks like the good guys,
are "certified statistically fair to
women", may get more deal flow from women,
and Betty, et al., can be happy that First
Round is so nice!

with

Else First Round looks like the good guys,
are statistically certified fair to
women, may get more deal flow from women,
and Betty, et al., can be happy that First
Round is so nice!

Replace

Notice that either way Betty, et al.,
are "happy". That's called "happy women,
happy life"! Or, heads, the women win,
tails they lose, and in no event is there
a huge crowd of angry women in front of
First Round's offices with a bonfire of
lingerie screaming "bias"!

with

Notice that either way Betty, et al.,
are "happy". That's called "happy women,
happy life"! Or, heads, the women win,
tails First Round loses, and in no event
is there a huge crowd of angry women in
front of First Round's offices with a
bonfire of lingerie screaming "bias"!

Replace

So, we want some statistical a hypothesis
test that is both multi-dimensional and
distribution free.

with

So, we want a statistical hypothesis
test that is both multi-dimensional and
distribution free.

Replace

We put our money down on the opportunities
with highest expected ROI until we have
spent all our money.

with

We put our money down on the opportunities
with highest expected ROI until we have
spent all our money. Done.
The Mystery of the Vanishing Pay Raise
Windows NT 3.1 was based on Microsoft OS/2 NT 3.0, it was originally Microsoft's version of OS/2 with the Windows 3>X GUI added to it instead of IBM's Presentation Manager.

The NT Kernel and OS was designed to run DOS, POSIX, OS/2 1.X CLI apps (But not GUI) and 16 bit Windows and 32 bit Windows apps. Later on OS/2 and POSIX support got dropped.

Microsoft OS/2 NT 3.0 was a rewrite of OS/2 for 32 bit systems, before that OS/2 was on 16 bit systems with 1.X and IBM and Microsoft fought over 2.0 standards, and Microsoft stopped support for OS/2 and focused on Windows instead. Then renamed their OS/2 to NT for New Technologies.

The Interesting thing about Windows NT was that Microsoft had plans to port it to different processors and eventually dropped those plans and stuck with X86 processors instead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

It was designed as a modified microkernel.
The "any questions at this point" comment seems a bit snippy and unnecessary, I was just trying to figure out what you were talking about... but no biggy here goes.

So financial derivatives? Futures, options, shorting etc? Derivatives can play a very important role in the financial system. They can also be abused.

Futures allow farmers (or airlines, or anyone else dependent on commodity prices) to hedge the chances of a bad harvest (or increased fuel prices) by locking in rates early. It's a form of insurance.

Options, (let's go with calls and puts) were initially seen as purely speculative, but combined with an actual position in the underlying security allow someone to make investments while minimizing their overall risk. Again they act as insurance by people who know how to use them. Morons can make naked calls or puts but the generally lose their shirt.

Shorting stocks plays a very important role in the financial world. Investors that short a company are one of the few entities that have a genuine interest in uncovering the dirt in a company. Regulators, share holders, etc may want to believe that a company like Enron is really doing well, but short sellers have a burning interest in combing through every line of their financial statement.

While CMO's got a bad name in 2008 they are still used today as a relatively high yield alternative to US Treasuries and other fixed income investments since the Fed has decided to keep interest rates near zero for the last 6 years.

CDO's also got a bad rap in 2008, but when used correctly they allow the transfer of risk from one party to another. Kind of like a cosigner on a loan. (gross over simplification, but good enough). If you're AIG and you don't actually have the money to backup all the CDO's your writing, then trouble can ensue.

Interest Rate swaps are probably what jacked up your dollar number in that article. They are the vast majority of derivative investments, but they allow companies with variable rate loans to hedge agains the risk of a rate hike, by swapping with a company that has higher, but fixed rate obligations. Those can be a very big win for both parties.

Financial derivatives get a bad rap because they sound scary and most people don't know what they are. They do however play a massively important role in managing risk.
Software doesn't necessarily need a license. Purchasing software can be simply a matter of handing over money in exchange for a copy of the software. Free downloads can simply be a matter of downloading a copy of the software. EULAs are everywhere, but not because they're necessary, only because software makers see some advantage in using them.
Yeah, I would really advise you to remove adsense(for me it is showing completely irrelevant ads), and focus on affiliate. It will be much more relevant and you will make more money.

And I would create a store, contact whiskey manufactures, and start selling their products, that shouldn't be too hard.

In fact, even for affiliates - contact the companies you want to advertise for personally, and offer them ads. Create beautiful banners that fit your design really well, and place them instead of adsense. And write articles along the lines of "the top best whiskey brands", with affiliate links. It will be much more profitable that way.
Sorry but your reasoning does not let pg off the hook. In his article he says that the way to determine bias is by measuring the performance of those that got through. With your excuse, all you have to do is measure the number of people that got through in a particular group relative to the other group.
But there are many massive investments at the academic and government research level that lead to nothing directly useful for consumers due to lack of investment interests in bringing it to market. Just look at the next generation Internet architectures that go nowhere. You can't ignore economics.
10 KLOC Projects
What are some examples of projects that, when finished, will have required the programmer to write 10 kloc?
UK's New Reporting Obligations on Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking
Oma similar note, what is up with the style/layout of movie scripts?

As an outsider it looks quite ugly compared to even a standard setting in google docs or word.

I'm sure it's mostly historical reason.
Documentation in PDF available?
Women musicians started getting orchestra positions in much greater numbers after auditions were made blind.

If biases affect how a professional musician hears music, is it so shocking to think unconscious bias might affect someone's judgment a candidate based on multiple fuzzy factors like ability, culture, and personality?

And that's just for job applications. You really think the criminal justice system has removed unconscious bias?
I'm pretty happy with systemd on my macbook (running Arch). Not sure what you're doing on that ledge, but I've been running and managing linux systems for over 10 years (I only use Windows for games, and OSX on the road). systemd's user interface (i.e. writing the confs, controlling the processes) is fine, and that's about all that's important for users.

What I don't get is why so many people are in this debate. It hardly matters to anyone what init system (or 'central management and configuration system') is used. It doesn't matter to users, they just want their linux systems to boot, and their confs to be easy to write. It doesn't matter to user space developers, it's just another system to implement support for, conveniently one that's used by most distros and as far as I can tell not terribly hard to grok.
That assumes that the content is actually worth $1/read. For example, blogs with pictures of cute cats get huge amounts of traffic, but if they start charging for access, 100% of their visitors will go away and find the same content for free somewhere else in about ten seconds. Most technical blogs have the same problem: for example, if you have a blog about Python programming, you're probably one of thousands. It's hard to compete with all the free content that's out there.
On the Importance of Internal Networking
Can anyone comment on whether it would be a good or bad idea to try to implement this in production ASAP?

I'm a bit far removed from the Linux kernel to be comfortable auditing that myself, but I run some high-volume/low-latency exchange clusters and the limiting bottleneck on requests/box has always been due to SYN/ACK negotiation.

I solved that currently by having hundreds of smaller servers, which distributes the network load quite nicely but isn't even coming close to maximal utilization of CPU. Realistically since moving from PHP to Haskell we're seeing about 1k req/s/box, but without the network slowing things down we're looking at a magnitude of increase on the current hardware.

Just FYI I've already handled the obvious, such as intelligent caching, nginx split upstreams, TIME_WAIT and reuse adjustments (1s), et al. Qualitatively, we're looking for an assurance on <= 100ms TTFB for the 99th percentile, in a way that allows us to use the most of our hardware via green threads.
Most of the arguments I read here are: it's OK for Apple to do this because they're a closed app, and the same content is on Youtube anyway.

Tomorrow Google says: "We remove this content from Youtube, Apple did it anyway and many of you thought it was OK. We're a company making money too, we're not the Government".

Now what's the argument? The first one to censor is OK, the second one is not?

A few people will still say: they can still use their own player and servers!

Then the UK govt will block them, if one does not ask explicitely their ISP to have a access to it. Then Comcast will throttle them through bad peering.

Then nobody will care anymore if it gets blocked further or not, they're out of most people's reach already.

Welcome to the new 21st century.
Interesting to see that the commit linked here has been yanked from the repo.

For the curious, here is the original commit comment:

> remove systemd support

> systemd people are not willing to play nice with the rest of the world.

> Therefore there is no reason for the rest of the world to cooperate with them.

> Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%...
> you're essentially postulating a giant unconscious conspiracy

Let me introduce you to the extensive scientific literature on implicit bias: http://www.aas.org/cswa/unconsciousbias.html
The biggest thing I missed was separation between routes and controllers. In Sinatra they're combined, it takes a lot of hackery to implement Rails-style routes. But you're gonna need them more and more as your web app increases in complexity.

Rails takes everything involved in web applications, breaks it apart, and figures out how to best implement it, then writes a nice guide to help you navigate the convention. If you learn how Rails does it, you're pretty much learning how to 'best' do it. So you can, for sure, re-implement it in Sinatra, but why? Rails already has a one-liner that will do exactly what you wanted it to do.

Generators is another big win. Once you learn how that system works, and granted, right now it's really hairy and not nice at all, but when you wrap your head around it, you can really turbocharge your webdev workflow, giving you Lisp-like superpowers without having to suffer the pain of debugging your own tools.

The sheer amount of knowledge embedded into StackOverflow is another huge plus. Something not working? Chances are someone has figured it out, and has documented it on SO.

I take pragmatism very seriously as a coder. I don't want to spend hours trying to figure out weird little things. I've got better things I could be doing. Rails gives me superpowers I never even knew I needed. If you've used Sinatra to build anything more complex than a dead-simple API, which is the only thing I would use it for these days, then you've probably worked hard to implement something Rails has already figured out and turned into a one-liner.

I get this spidey-sense when I'm developing in Rails, I'll be like, "surely somebody has done this already" and I'll search around on Google. Sure enough, most times I find the exact code I needed. Rails is the Rome of webdev. All roads lead to it. Just swallow your pride and use it, and you'll have the might of its legions at your back.
I have to make this comment with a throwaway as its related to my previous job. Leaving aside the technical issues the launch of systemd 'looks' very much like a playbook PR campaign designed to push through something unpopular.

The discrediting debates, labeling near abuse and mockery of opponents, appeals to authority and exaggerated consensus do not look accidental. This has all the markings of a sophisticated campaign.

For many this can be off putting but its also a wake up call on some naive ideas about how the world works. Money drives decisions, the cathedral and bazaar as a metaphor has no meaning when the bazaar has spawned a billon dollar cathedral in its midst, and like the failure of communism in practice this too could be anticipated. Money has its own agenda and always corrupts everything. And we all know this because its part of our historical record and common sense. And there is nothing we can do about that because in the real work words are meaningless. Individuals have zero power, groups have some power but its groups with money that hold the cards.

The Debian management tells users,not out of exasperation, or frustration but of arrogance that they essentially don't matter, and the only way they can have a voice is with code. This disrespect for users lies in contrast to a project that has none and thus the self awareness to realise it is meaningless without them. This new found arrogance sits uneasily with the ideals of the open source movement but anyone who draws the dots will realise its not an open source movement but a full fledged corporate movement with the thinnest veneer of ideology that is not up for 'management'.

For the next generation you cannot protect ideals if you enable and allow cathedrals to grow in your midst. For the current things do not automatically fix themselves, the awareness of the power of money to influence outcomes and how to firewall them, how to ensure co-existence, sustenance and growth, how to reward projects and developers and how to ensure you are not getting hijacked and sidelines by interested parties should be the 'community', and there is no such current organization in the ecosystem that's not tainted by corporatism and opportunism.
Batman vs. Superman Trailer
Of-course america is going to be country with the most american dollars !

All this analysis tells me is that america is suffering from the same sort of inflation that Spain suffered when it stopped becoming the economical power house and Britain suffered during the 20th Century. What happens is money that was issued as dollar debt to foreigners creeps back into the economy that taxes in american dollar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...

This list should tell you everything - The difference in purchasing power between a Swed and american is just 6,000 dollars.

This is not even accounting for how expensive healthcare /education is in america - since america does a shitty job training its doctors compared to European nations - and even cuba.
Even assuming equal distribution of ability, there is still the problem of whether you can measure performance without bias.
I have a online mobile school management app cum website .it include all facilities like the inter connection between studrnt teachers and parents and also have online fees payment ,discussion center , online exams , etc
Search Quoryz.com
Mob +971565920694
Rust functions return expressions, not objects and it is entirely up to the compiled code at the function call site whether it is placed in the stack or the heap, and whether the function code is inlined or not (thus expanding the stack allocated in the parent function). ::new doesn't create a structure, it just returns the expression that is supposed to initialize the struct in memory, which the compiler writes to the stack or to the heap through the Box constructor.

If you look at the antipattern example in the "Returning Pointers" section of the Rust book [1], you'll see how you are supposed to handle object creation (the box syntax is the same as Box::new) in a Rustic way

[1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/box-syntax-and-patterns.html
There is no inflation because QE money is used to keep up the demand for US Treasuries which keeps long term interest rates low. It jacked up asset prices because baby boomers can't get risk free yield by buying bonds so they are buying stocks. It's non just 1% baby boomers, it's all baby boomers.

Had QE 1 through 4 been dumped directly into circulation there would have been large scale inflation. I don't know anyone that would dispute that.

A little inflation (about 2%) is good because it means demand is outpacing supply. That means the economy is growing. That is different that inflation caused by the raw printing of money which is destructive. In WW2 Germany had considered the possibility of printing counterfeit British pounds and dropping them on Britain to destroy the currency and economy.
At this year's CppCon Herb Sutter the chair of the ISO C++ committee addressed just this issue of lifetime safety. Here is a video of his talk and includes a demo of the upcoming static analysis tool that can do this with very minimal annotations https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hEx5DNLWGgA

I remember thinking when watching the talk that this was a very bad day for Rust as C++ could now do most of what Rust was promising
What you described is not a right, and they are allowed to control what is or is not in their store. Whether you like it or not.
What I was taught in public school is that the Germans used slave labor and POWs to work in factories to make their weapons, tanks, planes, rockets, etc and this led to a quality control issue while the USA and Britain had well paid and well fed people who made better quality weapons, tanks, aircraft, etc.

The Russians had an advantage because of their AK-47 rifle and a lot of fighting was done at the Russian front as Hitler tried to take over Russia. People forgot that Russia did a lot of fighting as well as had better weapons and stuff as well.

The USA has military superiority because we have better technology and better trained people. For example our fighter jets are better designed and our pilots are better trained than their Russian counterparts. Most of the USA's enemies buy fighters and stuff form Russia, but they end up being no match for the USA stuff.
I question the value of adding MBs to your email to forcibly embed an image.

Actually this could become a liability if spammers catch on.
http://fountain.io/_img/fountain-quickreference.jpg
I'm hoping neovim will be able to adapt these ideas in the future.

They're addressing all the hardcoded parts so it should be possible to make any of these with an addon / some nvimrc magic.
Sorry, but what exactly is your point (in plain english)?

And I used the term "outsider" to refer to any perceived differences, whether its race, gender, religion, beliefs etc. And yes, some people condone; while others actively participate.

I'll repeat, as you seem to have missed mine: every culture, modern or historic, has its fair mix nobles and savages. Tagging a whole group of people as savages is just good old fashioned racism.
Haven't read The Society of Mind, but I enjoyed Incognito, which explores similar ideas: http://www.amazon.com/Incognito-Secret-Lives-David-Eagleman/...

And from a therapeutic perspective, I've gotten a lot out of Voice Dialogue - http://www.voicedialogueinternational.com/

Their book is geared toward practitioners but still quite good. I don't think you can do Voice Dialogue on your own. It helps to have a trained therapist.