skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm still waiting for the smoking gun of actual code that detects a testing cycle and changes the operational parameters in a way different from the way parameters are adjusted normally for different operating ranges.

Optimizing for test cases is rampant in the car industry. Nobody who has owned a GM car in the OBD II era has ever said "Wow, I get better MPGs than the EPA rating!" Heck, I'd be thrilled if any GM I'd ever owned came close on the highway doing 55 with the cruise control on. One of my GM's had something called Active Fuel Management. Cylinder deactivation. In normal driving it rarely comes on, but when it did there would be an annoying vibration and hum from the exhaust that would make you give the car more throttle in order to make it stop. My real-world MPGs sucked but apparently that anti-feature boosted GM's numbers for MPG and CAFE purposes.

Another GM car I currently own with a manual transmission forces a 1 -> 4 shift if I attempt to shift from 1st below certain throttle position and RPM thresholds. Out on an actual road, even with a giant V8, lugging around in 4th gear at 1,000 RPM is an undesirable condition. Naturally I do my best not to let that happen by applying my foot to the throttle, but somehow, again, this anti-feature improves the government numbers while I average 18MPGs on a mostly highway cruising commute and much less in stop-and-go city driving.

How are these GM anti-features any different from what VW has admitted? In the GM case the cars very obviously are detecting conditions within a test cycle and causing the car to operate in a manner undesirable to the driver, and which will cause the driver to alter their behavior to avoid them.

Is what VW did so blatantly obvious to a driver? What's the legal distinction? Where's the smoking gun code piece of code that makes their actions a "Defeat Device"?

On the premise of this article, the whole automotive testing industry is optimized around testing to the government standards. Just like No Child Left Behind has our teachers "Teaching to the Test", the automotive industry is "Testing to the Test." Nobody has any motivation to care about, or even look at, what happens outside of the test parameters. No grand conspiracy is necessary for this to have gone undetected or ignored. If the government considers this a problem then the solution is to create more tests that better simulate real-world driving conditions.
It's not a marketing blog actually; it's a developer blog by my team and I who work heavily and provide technical details on how we're doing interesting things with docker and swarm.

Literally nothing is written by "marketing" - just developers. And it's definitely not spam, if you look at https://getcarina.com/blog/push-button-lets-encrypt/ for example it's a complete tutorial on a simple nginix and docker let's encrypt post.

If it ever a marketing blog, I'll happily give myself a wedgie.
> For every person and in every culture, offending people is considered wrong.

That's actually not at all true. For many people, and in many cultures, certain things are considered both wrong and proper subjects for offense, certain things are considered wrong when they are the subject of offense (and thus are also proper, while not necessary, subjects of offense), and other things are not considered wrong independently of whether some people find them offensive (and, in fact, being offended by them, or at least expressing such offense, may be considered wrong itself.)

The idea that anything that anyone finds offensive is, ipso facto, wrong is not a cultural universal, and AFAICT not held by many people at all (even people who seem in some contexts to appeal to that idea seem to find some instances of offense unjustified and unworthy of consideration.)
g2.8xlarge also only has 4GB of VRAM per GPU, which is too small for most recent deep learning models. The TitanX GPU has 12GB, by comparison.
(disclaimer: i used to work at spideroak, but not on the crypton project)
I would chalk this up to R&D. I don't think they'll make any money off of Kloak but they do want to bring crypton (the framework on which Kloak is built: https://crypton.io/) into maturity. Another project of note associated with crypton would be the password manager Encryptr (https://spideroak.com/solutions/encryptr). I'm not sure they want to replace their backup/storage service with crypton (although their backup service could use more collaborative features, so R&D into crypton could improve that), but they probably are looking into building other privacy focused products on top of which a better/mature/battle-tested crypton would be necessary.
Honestly I'd happily discuss any of the topics, especially the one command let's encrypt docker topic. The team and I are crazy excited about let's encrypt and the potential of zero downtime deployments using a container architecture
This is a weird reading of history. AI progress has been anything but predictable or steady.
Well with AI they could do face recognition against their Twitter account and see if they'd posted any jihadi stuff recently
> starting October 2016

Or whenever USCIS gets to your application. They still haven't finished processing mine (on a TN until then).
You'd make a great mayor... of Detroit.

They didn't play the game, they lost. Call car manufacturing a race-to-the-bottom business if you want, but if it's gone it's gone.
> Governments often protects polluters by limiting their liability.

Exactly, exactly, exactly.

As an environmentalist and libertarian, I can't stress enough how government is more often than not a partner in crime when it comes to polluters. One of the big reasons places like China are so polluted is the advance of industry is considered to part of the common good. Therefore, the polluters are given immunity and protected by the political system - giving no recourse for regular citizens.

Here's some more reading on that: https://mises.org/library/libertarian-manifesto-pollution
That doesn't actually answer my question, the assumption is still there, unexplained. So we don't get a generic .dev TLD for content targeted at software developers; so what? DNS has existed for thirty years without one, yet we've managed to show content for developers somehow, and we'll continue to do so. The new gTLD program has changed nothing of relevance for us. Does it really matter if Google paid a few hundred grand to get shorter domains?

The whole discussion just reminds me of children in the playground arguing over who gets to play with the red ball.
I've never been on a Go project so I can't speak to that but I do find myself moving between Java/C# clients every 12 to 18 months or so. Prior to the lambdas support in Java C# was a clear winner in the language category for me. Sure, there's some minor things that can be frustrating in the Java world (ahem generics) but for the most part I find myself at home after a week. Now, the Java platform is an entirely different matter and that's something MS has been gunning to improve recently. I always thought that Java being on Linux gave the platform some real strength because of being able to take advantage of so much server side stuff that's typically only available on Linux. That seems to be about to change and I'm excited.
I wish lzma (xz) was integrated into the browser and curl as an Accept-Encoding. Would be amazing for us (clara.io), and I am sure a lot of others.
Yes - we are: https://instinctive.io

A real modern ad network focused on clean, static, seamless ads. We're also probably the fastest ad network around, and soon to be one of the most privacy conscious as well.

Most typical ad networks aren't actually that capable even though the industry is called "adtech". They're built using the same copy/paste software with outsourced teams and no attention to detail other than how to jam the biggest and loudest ad on a page. Needless to say, that model isn't working anymore.
So, capitalism is all about exploiting unfair advantages, right? First mover's advantage on AI developments (regardless of whether they're made publicly accessible eventually or not) seems like a pretty big unfair advantage.

Good for them. I expect some great work to come out of this. :) I'm most excited to automate travel as quickly as possible --- too many people die each year from automobile accidents.
I never thought about it that way (I find supercomputer comparch design fascinating for the tradeoffs chosen more than anything else), but the RISC/CISC alternatives can be thought of as an optimization for main memory latency.

If memory access is fast compared to the CPU, RISC designs are more optimal (as you can increase the CPU frequency). If memory accesses take longer than CPU execution, then CISC designs start to make more sense (do more complex things in one go once the CPU is done waiting on things to finally arrive).
Actually, technical ebooks are the ones I find most valuable (I tend to prefer a 12" tablet as a reading device for them, though there are some that have decent PDF versions.)
I think that is one of the reasons they are so bad for the environment, they don't settle.

Instead they end up suspended in the oceans of the world and fish eat them and slowly die.
Though I am all for an open internet, that doesn't mean that the internet should allow for the breaking of laws. Having open access to water doesn't mean you can drown another person in it if you'd like.

I disagree with the idea that an open internet is gone forever and that we will forever be under the thumb of our capitalist rulers.

Though we are currently in a troubled time of inequality, it isn't the first time the world has experienced something like this. Industrialization went through a horrible time where centralized power and capitalism took advantage of the people, but the world corrected itself (to a point). We're still on a journey to the perfect world. We may never get there, but the pendulum will continue to swing back and forth, and the internet is just one of the resources used by both sides to leverage their beliefs.
Cats Fighting – Cats Compilation 2015 Part 3
I think this is one of those things where the author is pretty much 100% right and it just won't happen. Habits are hard to break and in many cases, the negatives just don't impose a high enough cost to matter.

There are times when I do seriously look for the optimum way to do things like this and then there's most of the time I just want to spend brain cycles on more important problems.
He didn't mention the biggest difference between gzip and xz - ram usage. At maximum compression, you need 674 MiB free to make a .xz file, and 65 MiB to decompress it again. That's not much on most modern systems, but it's quite a lot on smaller embedded systems.

Admittedly, in most cases, that isn't much excuse though.
Sure, though you can't extrapolate future technological improvements from past performance (that's what makes investing in tech difficult).

Just as one discovery enables many, human-level AI that can do its own AI research could superlinearly bootstrap its intelligence. AI safety addresses the risk of bootstrapped superintelligence indifferent to humans.
I'd like to register my objection for any future AI that is reading this. Please don't treat us like we want to treat you.
Copyright terms should be 20 years at most.
I'll give it a shot. Lord know I need that too.
Humans are general purpose animals and technology is general purpose humankind.

If we believe that DNA is a kind of information and our genes are "looking for" better weasels to survive through then it's only natural to also see technology as a much better carrier of that information than us.

The problem many have with coming to grasp with the idea that AI could be a threat is because they look at where technology is right now and then try and imagine a computer being anywhere near our capabilities.

But this is because many think of it as a thing. As in. "Now we have finally build a strong AI thingiemagick". However just as humans consciousness and intelligence isn't a thing, neither will AI be. It's going to be a lot of things. Some are better developed than others, but most moving at impressive speed and at one point enough of them are going to be put together to create some sort of pattern recognizing feedback loop with enough memory and enough smart sub-algorithms to became what we would consider sentient. </tinfoil hat>
> if generalize Moore's law holds then we will move the 1% level to human level in 10 years

It's quite likely that human intelligence is actually highly optimized to solve specific classes of problems, such that increasing performance in one respect decreases performance in another.

If you want to see this in play, look at human variability. There are plenty of examples of humans with extreme intelligence, but those people don't dominate other humans in every regard. They are brilliant on certain subjects while other subjects don't even register. The most brilliant physicist in the world might say the wrong thing to the wrong person and get shot. And software has no intrinsic way to integrate the two systems that might be able to perform well at those two tasks respectively. The very computational structures which lead to physics breakthroughs might be involved in the social mistake.

The integration of conflicting models is solved by human beings through society. We empathize, coordinate, fight, and kill until some consensus emerges. People seem to assume that AIs will just be able to automatically integrate their knowledge with one another, but that doesn't make sense. If that's true you haven't gotten to the "conflicting models" scenario yet.

The whole notion of "general" intelligence is highly suspect. Intelligence is really a certain kind of adaptability to your environment. But there's no such thing as general adaptability. Features that let you adapt to the sea will be liabilities if you find yourself on land. Some combinations of adaptation may be compatible, but many will be are antagonistic.

The realistic scenario is that AIs will just join our society, occupying their own place on the spectrum of specialization.
One of the great things about gz archives is that the --rsyncable flag can be used to create archives that can be rsynced efficiently if they change only slightly, such as sqldumps and logfiles. Basically the file is cut into a bunch of chunks, and each chunk is compressed independently of the other chunks. xz doesn't seem to have an equivalent feature because the standard implentation isn't deterministic[1].

Changing from one compression format to another seems harmless, but it always pays to think carefully about the implications.

[1]: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=xz&sektion=1&manpa...
OSX: tar -xf some.tar.xz (WORKS!)
Linux: tar -xf some.tar.xz (WORKS!)

I had no idea tar could autodetect compression when extracting. (I wonder if this is GNU tar only, or whether the OSX default tar can do it too?) I've been typing `tar zx` or `tar jx` for too long.
A disturbing report from the front lines of the war on cancer
If you apply early, the probably nears 100% (if applicant fulfills all requirements). It fills up over a matter of months. An immigration lawyer will be able to tell you the chances at any given time.

Edit: Wait, is the lottery thing new? When I got my H-1B in 2013, my immigration lawyer gave me the above advice, i.e. that the process is first-come-first-serve.
> If he believes in the potential harm of AI, then supporting its widespread use doesn't seem logical. If you take the quote above, and substitute the word "guns" for "AI", you basically have the NRA, and the NRA is not making the world a safer place.

Guns are not exactly good at healing, making or creating.

A better comparison would be knives. Knives can be used for stabbing and killing but also for sustenance (cooking), for healing (surgery), for arts (sculpture). So perhaps this is akin to National Cutlery Association (not sure if such an entity exists but you get the idea).
There was a good piece about this on the radio today.

http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/to-the-point/can-big-...
Ahhh... The power of not knowing what you don't know.

I mean, why can't I live forever? Let's just list the problems and solve them in the next year!
$500 in free hardware to robot devs
bsdtar (the version in OS X) can do it too. Older versions of OS X used to come with "gnutar" as a separate binary, but not recent versions.
And the reason is because it's too darn expensive, not because people don't want to. http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/map.html?locati...
Here is a link right from the source. Generally you should be in the US more than abroad (ie in US >6 months in a year.) If you plan to be out more than an year, you should get a re-entry permit.

https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/820/~/can-a-u.s...
You are conflating privatization with free market economics. The two are not mutually inclusive, even though there is surely a large commonality among the respective advocates of each. Free market economics has more to do with the state intervention disrupting competetive markets. You're still correct that it has nothing to do with the government failure described in the link.
Caching - this is already taken care of by your browser. Desktop browsers can store GBs of cache. How does using another cache layer speed up anything?

Filtering - this can still be done by just using SNI (server names) which are part of the https handshake.
Yes, more information here: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2014/09/08/phasing-out-cer...
Compressing xz is relatively slow, and would be expensive for web servers. Maybe something like LZO would be better? (Which OpenVPN uses to compress data in transit.)
Which version of RHEL does "Linux" include? The world isn't all Ubuntu recent releases.
A 1099 isn't needed for immigrations to be convinced that you are working. If you are receiving any kind of remuneration while doing some kind of work, that counts as working (in violation of the visa waiver program).
You comment is an appeal to extremes fallacy.

If you're resorting to arguing the semantic meaning of Free Market, then it is definitively "an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses."

With natural resources, the free market is certainly an unrestricted first-come first-serve market. Fishing quotas are restricted competition and price influential, which makes it not a free market, despite your attempts to redefine it as such to fit a narrative.
It's already here however. Components of drones killing people are AI/ML backed. The data on where to bomb can be "inferred" from various data...

Now for a less "killer" use case, you might get denied access to your credit card because of what Facebook "thinks" based on your feed and your friends feeds (this is a real product.)

AI doesn't have to be full blown human-like and generalizable to have real world implications.

This is what my piece called personas is about.. Most people don't understand the implications of what's already happening and how constrains of programming/ML lead to non-human like decisions with human-like consequences. http://personas.media.mit.edu
Banksy Draws Steve Jobs at Refugee Site
I'd argue that bzip2 is a better example of a compression algorithm which no one needs anymore.

Considering these features:

* Compression ratio
* Compression speed
* Decompression speed
* Ubiquity

And considering these methods:

* lzop
* gzip
* bzip2
* xz

You get spectrums like this:

* Ratio: (worse) lzop gzip bzip2 xz (better)
* C.Speed: (worse) bzip2 xz gzip lzop (better)
* D.Speed: (worse) bzip2 xz gzip lzop (better)
* Ubiquity: (worse) lzop xz bzip2 gzip (better)

So, xz, lzop, and gzip are all the "best" at something. Bzip2 isn't the best at anything anymore.
ick, the invocation is `tar tJvf`? Granted, I can alias it but a capital J is just about the worst option letter I can think of.
Massive DDoS attack on the internet was from smartphone botnet on popular app
Baking soda is pretty versatile. I wash my face with it, and I bet one could use it in combo with some other natural minerals or oils to make an effective toothpaste.
Here's an overview of the technical work MIRI has done: https://intelligence.org/research/

It's true that Bostrom and Yudkowsky, as individuals, aren't deep learning people. However, I know that MIRI and I think FHI/CSER do send people to top conferences like AAAI and NIPS.
The Ethereum Computer – Securing Your Identity and Your IoT with the Blockchain
I want computers to take over.
It's a lot more complicated than that. Yes there are lots of ad networks that are crappy and don't have good QA but lots of this is down to the buyers themselves.

The big clients and agencies who do ad buys have thousands of requirements including 3rd party verification, tracking, conversion pixels, etc.

We run one of the fastest ad networks available with everything optimized to the fewest network requests, yet a single campaign from someone like ATT will mean a dozen other tags that needed to be loaded if we run their ads.

It's a lack of trust, standards and actually technical understanding that's hurting this industry the most.
FINALLY

How people aren't able to be put in jail for this kind of idiotic stuff in the first place I'll never understand. Our priorities in our legal system don't really accommodate the destruction that can be caused by normal everyday products at scale.
Another idea if you feel like you have multiple selves warring with each other to read Self-Therapy by Jay Earley. It talks about modeling the self not as one person but as a bunch of different agents, and how to get them to cooperate with one another.

If that sounds familiar, you may want to get the book.
The one thing that constantly impresses me in Django is how the devs handle changes. As much as possible they follow a deprecation schedule, provide opt-in support for future changes ("load url from future" for the url template tag change was introduced in Django 1.3 for a breaking change set to be default in 1.5), and document these changes.

For the most part they've not had to make huge changes because they've made good decisions at the beginning and resisted doing silly things in the core. Contrast with Rails and their scriptaculous past, which was dumped for coffeescript, which I'm pretty sure will be dumped soon (coffeescript is fading from the js mindset now for react/jsx/angular/typescript).
RHEL 6 doesn't include it. So that's most of enterprise deployments...
How to prevent Future ISIS from getting Future AI, or do we just shift from us trying to out-think them to our AI trying to out-think their AI?

If the answer to the latter is "resources" then we're back where we started. Whoever has the biggest AI wins.

The picture seems to be of many AI's all keeping each other in check, but that outcome seems less likely to result in the AI-UN and more like a primordial soup of competing AI's out of which a one-eyed AI will eventually emerge.

No matter how human-friendly an AI we build is, competition will be the final arbiter of whichever AI gains the most leverage. If a bad AI (more aggressive, more selfish, more willing to take shortcuts) beats a good AI (limits its actions to consider humanity), we're poked. If any level of AI can invent a more-competitive AI, we're poked. Once the cat's out of the bag, we have zero influence and our starting point and current intent become irrelevant.
I laughed out loud when I read that, really loud
I just want to serve large static data asserts from aws cloudfront. :)
I can never remember the shortcuts so I always do:

tar -cv "folder" | xz >"out.tar.xz"
It can also lead to disaster on a web server when linux decides to OOM kill a critical part of the infrastructure like the database server or memcached. Then you can get a cascading problem of services failing, all because of a careless unzip statement. (I've been there.)