skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Targeted advertising works. Retargeting works. Banner ads work. Not for everybody, but do you really think that all businesses pouring money to advertising are stupid? I've seen e.g. Facebook advertising to work for online fashion stores and numbers tell a clear story: it works. And that's the scary part, IMO.
What is ICE? India, China and something else?
Probably not in any searchable form. You could spider top 10000 sites and pull the banners they serve. Even the big firms who actually server the banners probably do not have a good archive, it's all disposable JPGs and PNGs to them.
An interesting article on the topic: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/the-rise...
Very exciting to see $10 pocket supercomputers in ubiquitous retail, but surely this is a just a loss leader? Wouldn't the patent transfer payments alone put this underwater?

Has anyone traced the origin of this model? Is it remaindered stock from somewhere (and therefore a sunk cost)?
Yeah, I've never understood this. I've seen it now-and-then when installing WA for family members, but I (and they) have never, ever had to pay for it after using it for multiple years.
> Now the person that DOES something about their shitty situation, now there's a person we call a hero.

Asking an administrator to fire someone who "makes you feel unsafe" is definitely doing something. They're not a hero.
Yes. I agree.

I see a lot of companies determined to outsource all of their IT work. As we all know, most of the time this fails miserably. But even sadder is when it succeeds. IT is the brain of any organization. If you succeed in distributing all the brains of your organization, all you end up being is an integrator. You've just spent a big part of your resources training technical folks in a bunch of other companies all of the important parts of your business. Success! You've turned your company into a giant brainless robot which efficiently runs on very little capital. And then you stagnate.
> Our bodies are essentially battle fields with different replicating agents struggling for control and a "place" in the future.

That's just another metaphor, and you have to be very careful with your choice there. To paraphrase Lakoff & Johnson[1]: the metaphors we use shape the thoughts that we understand through them. A very common one is thinking of arguments as war ("his viewpoints got attacked but he defended them well", etc). Imagine what would happen if we think of arguments as a dance?

[1] http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3637992...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine
Will I be expected to hit the ground running and be a rockstar coding ninja?

No.

Will I have a mentor to help guide me through their massive code base and answer my questions?

No.

Will they patient with me if I'm slow?

Yes, but only within a certain latitude. You'll be allowed to make mistakes, but only once - if you repeat the same mistake that's definitely considered a bad thing. You'll be expected to learn from your experience, from code reviews, and from what other developers tell you.

While that might sound scary it's also worth noting that you'll probably be given relatively simple tasks, like building forms and fixing bugs, so there's nothing to worry about. You should be able to do what's asked of you because anyone who has the confidence in their ability to even apply for the job should be able to do those things. Being "mediocre" is OK. Developer ability fits a bell curve - most developers are "mediocre" in the sense that they're in the middle of the curve rather than "great" or "awful" at the top or bottom ends.

Follow the company's practises, think through things, listen to other people, and find what you're good at, and you'll be fine. To be honest, I'd rather work with a junior dev who knows they're not a rockstar coding ninja but wants to learn than a junior dev who thinks they are, even if they actually are.
does this include disposing of all these batteries? I have no doubt that some range will come strictly from batteries/capacitors for all vehicles. I do not see the current battery technology which requires nearly a thousand pounds of batteries as doing it especially for the scant range it produces.

Innovation, just because it does not occur where you think it should does not mean the traditional automakers are not constantly innovation. It is the reliance on many suppliers that allows for innovation to move ahead quickly. All this work towards self driving cars came from developments made by the industry in making safer cars, from ABS to traction control to self aiming lights to airbags.

Electrification, the odd thing here is that Tesla kept a 12v system when many have been trying to move all cars to 48v. I think the author is too quick to dismiss the big companies, look how fast GM turned up with the 200 mile range Bolt which should debut before Tesla's III, let alone probably reach higher production numbers

Software, the author seems wholly tied up in interfaces. Why do many cars have all these dials? Assurance for the most part and a lot of tradition. Plus they aren't distracting, they are causal glance information sources whereas pretty screens and graphics likely will be distracting.

Oh, as for quoting Lutz, while he may not be your cup of tea the guy knows the current industry and how it all works. He does come off like a politician at times and keeps his name in the press by being loud
Sultangazi fetihs escort defne
The hope was that declaring war would be enough to cause Hitler to not actually invade. The reality was that the UK (who are the ones we were talking about) really didn't have much in the way of army or air force at that time.

As for the French tanks. In 1939-1941 tanks were fairly useless. The German dive bombers were the dominant weapon system -- it was only when the allies had decent air forces that the dive bombers became irrelevant.
Exactly my thought. Apart from the fact that it doesn't add anything to my existent Tool-chain at the moment.
The problem for me is that everyone (on Linux/OSX at least) has a bash shell, so investing in learning any other scripting language seems a little futile. Would recomend ZSH + zprezto or Fish for day to day use though.
A type system (at least scala)? Although Clojure does have one, it's not as good to use as Scala's (personal opinion).
He will lose Jewish votes simply because he is running as a Republican more so than his odd takes on history surrounding the Christian Church. All politicians have eccentricities, as long as they are harmless I am more concerned about what they want to accomplish. That and their character are my two big areas of concern
Disclaimer: I personally prefer clojure, but earn most of my money as a consultant / coach helping clients develop Java code.

For Java code, it's often easier to predict the performance characteristics of a part of the code. But you shouldn't trust your judgements anyway - instead use a profiler - so this is not really a reason.

Speaking of performance: I once talked to someone working for Elasticsearch, and they told me that they cannot use clojure for most of their code because of their performance requirements. Clojure collections are almost as fast as Java collections in many scenarios, but that is apparently not fast enough for them. This is probably not a valid reason for most projects, though.

There is a huge number of Java developers out there, and Java is easier to learn for someone coming from C++ or C# or JavaScript than clojure (at least I am pretty sure about that). So hiring cheap developers might be easier if you use Java. You might count that one as a political statement.

There are some great tools for Java out there: IntelliJ Idea, Yourkit Profiler, JRebel, ... Cursive Clojure is great, but IntelliJ for Java has even more integrated workflows.

There are very mature open source libraries / frameworks / tools for Java: JUnit, Spring, Guice, Dropwizard, Gradle, Elasticsearch, ... You can have commercial support for many of them. Most of the libraries I use with clojure are version 0.3 or something like that with no possibility for commercial support (but they work fine anyway).

Static typing: A lot of people complain about it, but it can really help you to create maintainable code. See for example http://talks.samirtalwar.com/use-your-type-system.html
> The fact that it works better than other kinds of advertising is a pretty relevant bar.

And that's in a nutshell both the solution and the problem because users have only so much to spend on product. So you end up with an arms race and that's exactly what we are seeing.

It's like the joke about two guys in a jungle, one with boots, the other with running shoes. The one with boots asks why are you wearing running shoes. The second one answers: In case we get chased by wild animals. "You won't be able to outrun a wild animal so don't bother, wear boots". To which the guy with the running shoes says: "I only have to outrun you".
I think that with architecture design becoming increasingly important in processor performance, and on the heels of Intel-Altera, CPUs or GPUs may gradually add "FPGA-like" aspects, where the configuration of the silicon can be dynamically shifted in order to achieve different tasks.

Personally, I would love to see a day when FPGA coprocessors are a thing, and FPGA companies are big enough to make it happen.
Hi thank you mortimerwax, I already find Prof. Joe Blitzstein's book quite intuitive to understand probability. I just need a supplementary book/resource for practice of extra problems. I find that for most books, the solutions manual is made available only for professors and not for students.
Pinpointing Targets: Exploiting Web Analytics to Ensnare Victims
In the same way some people pick C++ over Lisp, some would choose Java over Clojure for similar reasons.

It's not some kind of war or personal affront to you - some people simply prefer the Algol style to the Lisp one. This even includes people who are very fluent in the Lisp style.
There are apparently already a thing (Xeon processors with FPGAs seem to have come out a while ago).
I don't get what imbalance this article is talking about? Advertisers pay publishers to market their products, and sometimes it is financed with VC money - but this is true of any market, not particularly adtech.

Someone sells inventory, someone buys inventory, and there are middlemen to make this happen. Maybe too many companies are competing to be the middleman, but that's a problem that exist in every market (food delivery?). In the end some companies will die, so what?

I can't see where a gap is created other than this. Investors are betting on technology companies, that are supposed thrive when even more money is spent on programmatic than today (taking away budgets from TV, search...)

Maybe the author is not making a good enough distinction between publishers and technologies? The diagram of "advertising" the author refers to is almost entirely composed of technologies - very few agencies or publishers.
The apple music search is also atrocious - that gets a relook as well hopefully.

I think in general, we (or at least I) have underestimated how good Google is at search, probably a result of how they have been monopolising talent for the last several years. This technical superiority (particularly in the machine learning space) is going to be a huge advantage going forward, as already evidenced by how much better Google now is than Siri.
That's something Amazon already knows if you bought it through them...

And even if such a button were present one could press it even though the product had not been bought.
I had a coworker that'd cringe every time I used it because I used that shell instead of one of Emacs's other shell modes.
There is no non-political reason to enumerate choices of languages limited to those that run on the JVM.

Clojure and Scala exist because of the JVM, not because of Java. Java 8 will or won't be an interesting language independently of the JVM, oddly enough.
Good writeup by Jan Gray.

If we look at it from today, some things have changed, but the end result holds true - at least for general purpose computing.

The FPGA vendors (esp Xilinx and Altera) have released devices where the intergration between a hard CPU core and the FPGA is much tighter than using a standardised bus like PCI. This gives a much lower latency. In these devices the CPUs are normally ARM based.

The prevalence of GPUs as PCIe connected coporocessors and OpenCL has also made FPGA based computing connected via PCIe much easier.

One thing that has not improved, but rather worsened is the difference in clock frequency between CPU and FPGA. In Grays posting he talket about PPro running at 200 MHz. Today we have cores running at 2-3 GHz while FPGAs are hard to push beyond 200 MHz.

For applications that are highly parallel, takes a lot of cycles and not suitable for GPU processing, FPGAs might be useful as base for custom coprocessors even for x86, Power, SPARC based servers. But otherwise probably not.

For embedded systems FPGAs makes more sense, but cost of the device and power consumption might make it less so. The integrated SoC devices from Xilinx and Altera can do cool things like media processing, SDR competitively.

The Novena is an example of a modern system where the CPU has access to a FPGA over a low latency interface which makes it useful as a coprocessor. But the Novena is really not built to be cost efficient.
Why We Use OCaml
> Yes, but only within a certain latitude.

Another piece of advice related to that. If I am giving long, complex and detailed explanations to a new guy, and he is not taking any notes.

I have to assume that :

1. He has a good memory, and he will remember everything tomorrow (and I am totally fine with that)

2. He is totally oblivious of what I am talking about, and he will ask the same question tomorrow.

So please, never put yourself in category 2. Be a genius, or take notes. And always taking notes, especially the first week, is useful because you'll get a lot of information in a short time. It is good to be able to process it a bit later on.

For bonus point, if this is actually some process we have not documented and should be, take this opportunity to create a reference document for the next guys, it will be appreciated by your co-workers. You have a fresh look on things, this is valuable.
iOS 9 Reverse Engineering with JavaScript
i love to see things like this.
I think the article goes off the rails where he says that the money going into advertising companies as investment ends up in the pay-out stream. I have seen no evidence of that to date (but I'm happy to be informed if there is such evidence). Up to there it is mostly accurate.

The path investor money takes if it ends up with the industry is that it is used to buy advertising for new products and services backed with investor money.

And so I also disagree with the conclusion. There will not be an implosion, but what there will be is a change of direction to maintain revenue. This has historically been true of advertising in general, ads today on TV for instance are totally different compared to ads on tv in the 90's, the 80', the 70's and so on.
There's a gravitational pull towards popular languages because popular languages have more books, more (idiomatic) libraries and tools, copy-pasteble examples all over the web and a big pool of developers that can be productive from day 1 on simple problems.

In order to adopt a language that isn't in the top 6 or so, you've got to have good reasons for it. And depending on the problems you're trying to solve, sometimes it's worth it, sometimes it isn't. For a startup, with a small but capable team that's trying to outrun its competition to market, then using the most productive tools possible is a good choice. In other contexts though, like in a big company where long-term maintainability might be more important than speed to market, well, Java might be the better choice, and not because of the language per se (I think Java code is often unreadable), but more because the cost of maintainability is low due to its popularity and its slow pace of change.
There have been a few projects to generate VHDL/Verilog using an LLVM backend, a quick google brings up some interesting presentations. I imagine constraints similar to those that the links OP brings up are why these aren't more mainstream.
That's actually used in geological imaging. They might use small explosions or shoot the ground with a shotgun or drive over it with series of overloaded trucks. You can't destroy the surface of the pyramid with TNT, so it might be tricky.

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

Other possibilities are ground radar. With big bunch of different problems. Mainly there is anything conductive in the surface layers, ground radar can't get past that. Typically it's only used to few meters depth, the deeper you go, the less you get data out of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-penetrating_radar

And radiographic means. These typically give best image. Dalke explained that some form of these was used elsewhere in this thread. These are possible as you can have receiver at the opposing side.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_radiography
How to earn thousands of dollars a month freelancing online
Losing my ego to the team
>Your message is a little disjointed. Are "other parts" marketing or not-marketing? Take your pick.

Oh, I see what you mean. I meant to write: "are essential to the production of the item" (scrap "not").

>Anyway, the article doesn't discuss where ad money goes. It would need to use figures for that.

It would only need figures to do that in detail, whereas the article wants to give an overview of where money goes, not go into numbers.

>It's irrelevant whether a cost is "essential" to the production of the item. Distribution is a cost that's not part of production.

Well, even if I got the wording wrong, I obviously consider "distribution" an essential cost too. It might not be part of production per se, but it's necessary for getting the item to the buyer. Advertisement, much less so.

There are tons of products that are sold without any advertising, but very few sold without distribution (e.g. some products you get directly from their makers' facilities), and it's totally inconvenient for larger items or items manufactured abroad.

>You seem to suffer from the very common bias of "build it and they will come."

Well, if we're to discuss my preferences on the matter, that (non advertising) is how most commerce worked for milenia, and how it's working even now for millions of non-advertised products.

Sure, for people to know and buy specifically an X brand, it takes advertisement.

But that's neither essential to society's functioning, nor beneficial (e.g. allows crappy products to advertise more than good ones, and be preferred over them, and also makes people over-buy with ads as constant reminders for consumption).

As a consumer why should I care whether brand X sells -- except if I'm its owner?

People can still buy whatever they want and need, without advertising. And in that world the best products can get word of mouth and organic growth unobscured by paid advertisement. As for further "discovery" there are always articles and posts about upcoming products, reviews, etc.
Well, that's a given, right?

In other news: http://news.mit.edu/2013/inexpensive-nano-camera-1126
Goldilocks Management
> But you can hardly do that by accident.

Exactly, and plenty of closed source router firmwares expose the same option. And radios (Japanese radios can listen on German police frequencies, I think), etc. pp.; basically everything with an antenna that's sold in more than one country.
I gave several examples of non-Bayesian reasoning going into discrimination, with blood type being the most prominent. Hence I conclude that thinking about discrimination primarily as humans applying Bayesian reasoning is not a useful framework to think about the -isms. I see no need to introduce a new mathematical framework given the historical evidence says there is no such simple explanation.

We need only look at how humans do risk management. Driving is dangerous, and one of the leading causes of death. Yet people are more scared of airplane crashes, despite how flying is a less dangerous means of transportation. Or, parents are increasingly worried about the safety of their children despite the clear evidence that childhood now is safer than ever. We also see people who gamble on the lottery with the incorrect belief that there are winning streaks or lucky numbers. Thus, human responses are clearly neither Bayesian nor frequentist.

I therefore don't see why you think a Bayesian approach, or something close to a Bayesian approach, helps understand the topic.

FWIW, an analysis of the sex-based skew in the prison population would also need to look to many other factors, such as the huge increase in incarceration rates over the last few decades, the strong racial component, the different social roles of men and women in US culture, and more.

Such a model would also need to explain why, if people thought that men are inherently more dangerous then women and "suffer a lot of discrimination as potential criminals", so many more social roles which require trust or safety traditionally went disproportionately to men. Perhaps there is some confounding variable which is more significant than being a male? For example, if the prior is multi-modal, the is there a reason for the two modes?

As another hypothesis which fits the limited data you presented, supposed that men in US culture are supposed to be more trustworthy than women and as such have more power and control. If men break that trust, then they are punished more harshly then women, and for a longer time. That would explain the disproportionate distribution of men in jail, despite the the normal bias for men in the culture.

While that is certainly a form of discrimination on the basis of sex, it's not the same sort of discrimination which made black people scared for their lives in a sundown town.
Call it well-developed banner blindness. Too well-developed, I'd say, as I caught myself at times (and ended up in an IRC flamewar once because of it) missing pieces of content because they looked too much like ads. It's amazing how your brain can learn to filter out the noise before it reaches conscious level. I also don't care that much about security implications other than malware. All that combined with me a) generally not visiting mainstream sites, and b) being too lazy to install a new extension meant that I managed to run without ad blocker for a few years.

Ultimately it was YouTube ads that play before videos that were the last straw; I sometimes run YT as music source and I got too pissed off about having to listen to 30 seconds of unskippable advertising in order to get to 120 - 240-seconds long video. Mostly it's mood-breaking.
Nothing in marketing is ever going to be a silver bullet. The seconds something is shown as a slight improvement everyone is going to use that as their new strategy until it looses it's effect.

The thing to remember about advertising is that at the end of the day it's really about finding ways to be different than it is about anything else. And so when everyone is doing TV ads, start doing online ads, when everyone is doing online ads, start making centent marketing, when everyone is doing content marketing use email and so on. It's an ever moving target. Thats why it's effective when it works.
Apart from the slightly better performance, memory consumption. Clojure's persistent collections require a fair amount of memory (which in most cases doesn't matter as memory is cheap).