skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Free speech does not give you the right to hate speech.

I would argue that's exactly what it does.

I'd further argue that hate speech and the threat of violence should be separated into two distinct categories for clarity. Clarity is extremely, extremely important when you're dealing with the edges of acceptable speech. It's dangerous to load them both into one concept that can be wielded by politicians and the media for control purposes over speech and free expression.

It's also important to clarify that the threat of violence is not a form of speech, it's a threat (of violence). That's another obvious reason why "hate speech" should not cover threats of violence to begin with, it intentionally muddles the concepts. Just like smashing someone in the face should not fall under free expression: it's an act of violence. Free speech ends at the point of violence, putting violence and speech together generates a contradiction of terms that can only benefit people looking for levers of control.

The concept "hate speech" is already a broken, frequently abused tool for controlling people. It's clearly going to get much worse in the coming years given the rise of extreme political correctness, the 'protect my feelings' movement. "Hate speech" is by default devoid of nearly all meaning, and nearly anything can be claimed to be hate speech, because "hate" is a generic term that can vary wildly and is inherently subjective. It was of course used for that exact reason: you can't legislate control over speech, therefore create empty jargon to do the same thing, and then load anything you want into it. A method frequently employed by totalitarian regimes.

Are my posts, which openly express my dislike of elves, hate speech? You bet. Why? Because I say so. You can never successfully refute that.
"You only get 1 beak, best to let the ground do the work."

Great observation. This must be a cheap adaption, same technique, different continent.

I've seen Crows do similar things. Magpies and Kookaburras also use branches to kill what they catch. Instinctively they smash what they have in their beak on a branch. Have yet to see one use a stick though.
DDG results have improved tremendously, top stack overflow / github matches are shown partially which is really neat

I FULLY switched to DDG (& also away from Chrome) when I found out when I click save password on login forms my password is sent to Google Servers (I must have missed it on the TOC)
When I shave (which is not often, aside from the neckbeard), I use an old, inherited Schick Injector[1]. I bought a batch of blades years ago on Amazon from Germany for a few bucks and haven't used them up yet - they never seem to actually get dull, so I just replace them when they start to rust.

Never really understood the purpose of shaving cream - hot water has always been plenty effective enough, and any type of soap or lather or cream makes a mess and leaves my skin oily.

I have a suspicion that, like women's cosmetics, hair shampoo, and neckties, shaving customs solely exist to vacuum money out of people's wallets and be inconvenient.

[1] http://www.safetyrazors.net/schick/schick_razors5.jpg
Checking in with the Guy Who's Eaten Raw Meat for the Last Seven Years
That's what you call a fixed mindset :) .
This sort of corruption is still running strong here in India. A few days ago an acquaintance of my father told him that he knows a guy who can get her daughter a government job for a fee of 8 lakhs (~$12,000). And that he would go for it, given he had this much money. The sentiment was that he treats this bribe as an investment, which can be recovered from the job salary in a couple years and is worth it.
"There's no one at Microsoft who was just kind of mediocre for a couple of years, and then just out of the blue started optimizing everything in sight."

That's a fixed mindset if there ever was one. He's saying its extremely improbable for someone to go from mediocre to super skilled.
Except the single male to single female ratio is the other way around in NYC.
The problem here is that the dream is dying for those of us coming to SF to work in startups. The harsh reality is that more and more of us are going to look towards the better deal at the bigger companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Netflix, etc. Companies that provide both excellent salaries and benefits along with potentially as lucrative stock grants.

It's time for the startup community to reevaluate the idea that your early employees (say pre 50) should get 0.05% of the company when they take the monetary risk of working for a startup. With such small ownership, it is starting to become a sucker bet.

So for those coming here, keep your eyes open and know that right now it's only founders, management and investors making out and if you are not looking to hit the lottery, you'll do much better working at a bigger company, maxing out that 401k and investing the rest. Or go for lottery but be a founder -- sure, get the experience of working at a startup but keep a careful eye on your personal burn rate (in regards to your potential earnings). And if you're not learning and you still want to learn more, make the move to the next startup. The options just aren't worth the wait.
Ah, the "corporations are AI" meme.

Corporations are only superhuman in the most trivial literal sense that a group of people is (slightly) more intelligent than one person. To make any sort of analogy from this to actual superhuman AI is utterly absurd. A group of people with competing and even contradictory interests is an insanely inefficient way to carry out even rudimentary computations.

For instance, a superhuman AGI will utterly crush an average human corporation at even the simplest task like categorising 40000 images by subject. Let alone something of easy-to-moderate difficulty like hacking into the Pentagon.

Which is to say, that your "This is to say," is nothing but a non sequitur, and that this analogy is a nonsense and an impediment to clear thinking about the capabilities of computers.
Not only is it a sausagefest, but there are some shockingly strong veins of thought which hold that you're a terrible person. For the unpardonable sin of being a "techie".
Unless someone tampered with the logs, of course.
Agreed. Also maybe the fact that it's a Unity game.
Nice quote from Dmitri!

“They’re a little bit like a cautious student driver or a
grandma.” --- Dmitri Dolgov, principal engineer of the program.

No one likes getting stuck driving behind grandma. I expect as the tech sees more of the light of day, they will go from 'cute curiosity' to 'extremely frustrating to drive near'. They will pin you, in some cases, well below the speed limit, which is often set dangerously low.

When someone dies trying to pass one of these things, of course it won't be the robots fault...

Robots should drive to minimize their impact on the road. That would be my guiding philosophy. That means driving appropriate speeds at appropriate times, and not creating a dangerous situation for other drivers. "Slower traffic ahead" is a big danger on the freeway.

A human driver would be expected to speed up and merge with traffic and not create an impedance. There is no question the right thing for the software to do is to exceed the posted limit.

Imagine a government so willing to help spur investment in driver-less cars they set a different statutory limit for the AI to follow (class-by-class)? Sounds like a very cool way to solve two problems at once. Based on the specifics of the road, visibility, and telemetry, weather, etc. the tech gets a huge boost if the robot can travel significantly faster.
I asked my Taiwanese friend about this and she said when she was a kid, Taiwanese maps would have a larger Taiwan compared to China. She said it was to make Taiwan seem more important.

So there is at least some truth to what she said
Paying $180K for options worth $350K (over 4 years) isn't a terrible trade - that's about an 18% IRR annually, even ignoring that the $180K was a stream of $45K annually instead of a lump sum. He could've done better elsewhere in SV, but I guess this is why the article says it's enough to buy the world's smallest violin.
My personal, preferred way to interview data scientists (besides administering a work sample test) is to talk to them about the most challenging effort they've been a part of. Start with understanding the overall business context and the technical infrastructure they were working with, and gradually follow through until you understand the key ideas that underpin the innovation.

The key is to get them to explain things until you understand the essence at a foundational level - hopefully you understand what combination of the notions of statistical independence / power / dimensionality / algorithmic complexity has birthed novel system or algorithm they built.

The process selects for people who have a) already built something substantial, and b) have the communication skills to explain it.
Yes. Reloaded was OK.
Could Borophene Rival Graphene?
Do you feel like it is getting better or worse?
CXOs do not talk directly to anyone other than CXOs right?
Muslims or Arabs should be there too., unless you want to ban them!
Shit headline. As if being from Stanford makes this worthy of being on Hacker News.

Please people. CS has been being used for social good for quite a while. Better headline would be something that says that Stanford has actually started a class about social good.
In Western Australia the prevailing culture within the Main Roads Department is "If people get used to having green lights they won't stop for a red light so we must try make people get as many red lights as we can" its moronic but true, a technician friend of mine resigned over the stupidity of it.
I agree with what another guy said -- you should do the ethical thing and stay out of it. You're his buddy and have already rallied enough about how he's a Good Guy and was just confused. We get it.
If you figure out when leases are up in your area, you can pick up a lot of nice antique furniture for free. Often, people will be so happy to see you take it, so they don't have to pay to get it disposed of.
There was similar scam in Turkey http://mobile.todayszaman.com/anasayfa_30-released-in-case-o...

The investigation still continues even today.
What about: "The US and Western Europe should attack ISIS soldiers", or "Convicted murderers should be executed by the state". Both of those statements are condoning and encouraging harming others. Should they be removed?

Can you not see the impossibility of regulating which speech is justified, and which is not?
Juniper hasn't released nearly enough details to conclude that this was related to Operation Aurora.
Unless I'm misunderstanding, it's relevant because this researcher was able to access (from the blog):
-- SSL certificates and private keys, including both instagram.com and *.instagram.com

If this researcher was able to access it via not much more than a hole that was _already reported multiple times_, then I think it's not a stretch to think that [many?] other less honest parties could (and in my opinion most likely do) already have it.

If it was me, even if it's definitely only a single researcher who got access (and it doesn't sound to me like they know for sure - but regardless), something _that_ sensitive would have to be rotated anyways. If it was someone outside the teams that strictly require access to it operationaly, I'd rotate it, let alone outside the company.
Well said and I think that is the exact problem. It's also coupled with a 10-11 year to IPO duration. In the past, it was much shorter. The equity game doesn't make sense anymore. You can see it in how hard it is to hire in SF as a startup and as more people see it, it is only going to get harder unless things change.
They added a "Verbatim" mode to force all search terms to appear (in the "Search Tools" bar, click "All results" and change it to "Verbatim"). But it's all-or-nothing; it can't be applied to individual terms. It also can't be combined with the timespan searches; changing one resets the other. The old syntax with + was definitely more useful.
What you said doesn't make much sense. Much more important than the algorithm is the market that the algorithm operates in. Uber couldn't unleash a magical algorithm and solve commuting inefficiencies for every user if there isn't a sufficient density of both riders and drivers (i.e. the main inputs to the algorithm in this case).
UW has never had that high percentage of Chinese students; from the demographics report:

http://www.washington.edu/omad/files/2015/02/2015-01-09-UW-S...

So they (Asians, other) are at 21.5% in 2014/15. Note that international has its own separate slice, at 14.7%, that isn't broken down. So...that means all that 21.5% are American, possibly of Chinese descent, which is far away from Chinese nationals.

UW is a commuter school, I think 75% of the students live at home even. So if you were living on campus, your view of the demographics would be a bit skewed. Incidentally, in 2013, UW admitted a class of 6,255, 687 of which were Chinese, roughly 10%, which still isn't shabby:

http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/10/14/uw-fall-2013-enrol...
This is my belief. It was worse when Congress was in power. Now that Modi is in power, I'm hopeful India's state would improve.

But this goes without saying, I don't really know. No one really knows. Modi has committed a lot of atrocities during his term as a CM for Gujarath.

The only feeling that sticks with me is, fear/uncertainty of future.

Still not sure why I'm being down voted. I did provide some reasoning as to 'why' I'm being uncertain.
I am confused because what you are saying negates your main point, no?
I actually don't think it's true, but it would take a large study to prove anything obviously. My personal experience was that it was much easier to have a fling or some other form of temporary relationship in NYC vs SF. Strictly for context, I spent a portion of my 20's literally living in both cities, without a committed relationship in either location. In NYC you could "get laid" relatively easily, but actually dating was harder. In SF there was more actual dating, which generally led to sex but it took longer. Which one you prefer is going to be a matter of taste obviously -- I actually preferred SF, the hookup culture felt pretty shallow to me. This was all more than a decade ago for me though, and everything I've heard about Tinder and such leads me to believe the hookup culture is pretty active in SF at this point. Life on the Peninsula is probably way worse for dating, simply because it's so much more spread out.

And now I need an anonymous posting button for HN. :)
"Yeah, so, like, everyone here that's not from here works in tech, so you say you work at Apple and that doesn't really do anything for me."

When I heard that, I knew Silicon Valley had nothing left for me, and I've never looked back.
There is no such thing as "hate speech". What you call "hate speech" is merely speech that you find disagreeable. Free speech is valuable not when it protects those who already agree with you. "Hate speech" is very vaguely defined, and you can use the label to smear people raising perfectly legitimate facts like "group differences are recent, profound, and heritable".
That's debatable considering your current position in the society and your point of view.
It's hard to compete.

No woman is going to sleep with an average dude making $150,000 when she can sleep with the better looking, smarter guy down the street sitting on $8 million in Dropbox stock.
Thanks for the information. I cede to most of your points, especially on codecs. :) A few more questions:

> Which proves it is possible, and could have been done 5 years earlier to kill off Flash.

How would HTML5 video, using OS codecs, kill Flash unless it also had DRM support? Flash has had DRM since 2007 (Flash Player 9).

> I think Mozilla is responsible for EME being completely accepted. Before announcing EME support, it was still possible to argue that EME was not supported by all browsers, an admittedly small reason for websites to not use EME.

Chrome shipped EME in 2013. Safari and IE shipped EME in 2014. EME content was already live and supported by ~60% of browsers when Mozilla began implementing EME in mid-2014. Perhaps Firefox could continue to lean on Flash and Silverlight to play DRM'd video.. until content providers decide they don't want to continue supporting NPAPI for Firefox's small market share. Flash is insecure and Silverlight is on the path to EOL.

> The claim was that this was necessary to safe their market share. Well, that didn't work

Whether EME has any effect on Firefox market share is yet to be seen. It just went live this week. Chrome or Edge users are unlikely to switch to Firefox because they want DRM video to stop working.
Book worthy material!
I'm curious: who will they turn to if (when) Yahoo shuts the service down? Bing?
Go 1.6 beta1 and Apple's new HTTP/2 push notification service both were released today. What timing!
"If you switch a 70 year old woman, to a 70 year old man"

Or pretty much anybody other than an elderly white woman (in a "western" country). Anyway, I don't think the physical violence was necessary but I do admire her intervention on behalf of a stranger against an obnoxious (probably racist) act.
They would be.. except Russia and Canada are shrunken on most world or US/Europe maps because of the distortion from the map projection. Yet another mapmakers conspiracy.

(everything else that's far from the map center is of course also affected this way)
Except what counts is explicitly encoded in law, not what anyone makes up.

"Are my posts, which openly express my dislike of elves, hate speech?"

No, because that's really silly. The law would let you do that.

If instead you asked people to kill people, that would be taken down.
I did the challenge and it was a fun endeavor. I'm mainly a C# dev. I dabble in AngularJS at work but don't consider myself a pro. I'd never tried drawing to the canvas so this seemed like a good challenge.

I managed to get something fairly workable, albeit ugly code-wise, banged out in 1hr. If you reviewed my google searches, you would see that:

- I didn't know how to init a 2d array in javascript

- I didn't know that the things on the canvas couldn't be accessed directly for click handlers

- I cheated on the solution for finding neighbors because I was running out of time

*edit formatting
I made the switch. My biggest problem with the lack of
privacy is that I don't know in X years how my data will be
used. In X years - laws may change - mores may change -
the fortune of google may change. It just doesn't seem
prudent for me and my progeny.

For example searching for information about cigarettes
or cigar clubs - 30 years ago may have been socially
acceptable. Today if that information were available
from the 80's it could provide signal for insurance
companies determining rates.
DuckDuckGo really is good enough to use on a daily basis now. One big gripe I still have however, is that there seems to be no way to filter by time. I still have to go to google if I want to find a news article or topic which is recent, or within a certain period.
This is part of the "The Long Read" series, The Guardian publishes one every weekday: http://www.theguardian.com/news/series/the-long-read

It's certainly much easier to publish long, detailed reads online than in newspapers, but I haven't seen any real increase in the numbers.
There's this obsession now about how everything in tech needs to be worth it strictly monetarily without paying attention to anything else. Personally, I think that attitude is toxic. Teachers don't teach because of how much they'll get paid. Nurses don't become nurses because of how much they'll get paid. Same for fire-fighters, non-profit workers, artists, and everyone else doing jobs they find particularly fulfilling.

The same ought to be true of start-ups. Sure, you can make more expected money working at Facebook redesigning their like button, or whatever. But, at a start-up, you can have a huge hand in building something much bigger than yourself from scratch. You get to be a jack-of-all-trades, learning a bit of everything, making something hundreds of thousands of people will use go 0 to 1. You get to be incredibly important to the company and have a say in just about every decision if you want it. That role is still romantic to me, and that's why I've worked and continue to work at start-ups. I know I can make more money somewhere else. I don't care. And I want to work with other people who don't care either. If your motivation is just money, there are plenty of big faceless companies doing fun stuff like ad-tech that will be happy to pay you, and you'll be doing your start-up coworkers a favor by leaving.
The difference is proximity and legitimacy. One can say ISIS should be bombed but that's a matter of war, declared by one's state, and is therefore considered legitimate. It's also far different from posting "Someone should stab these immigrants down the block living in state housing."

Yes it's hypocritical and arbitrary when considering that we are all humans, but that is simply how law and society stratifies speech worthy of regulation. I don't think it's impossible at all.
I don't think he is claiming 1 million for the bugs, he mostly wanted to share the whole story (that title was just to get some eyeballs instead of using maybe "facebook cheated me")
This also pops up in SICP, first in an exercise (a re-tread of fibonacci, SICP's fizzbuzz) and in several other places later.

It seems like an example of the importance and influence of notation - many commonly used languages these days have first class functions but nobody using a lisp-2 variant would have thought to give this particular thing a special name.
Sorry, but being a multi-billion company, pledging $1M bounty and giving only $2500 for a serious bug which could lead to taking control of the whole Instagram is greedy. I can understand why the researcher didn't stop there.
Roundabouts - that's what I'm talking about.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/roundabouts/qanda and others cite "Retting, R.A.; Mandavilli, S.; Russell, E.R.; and McCartt, A.T. 2006. Roundabouts, traffic flow and public opinion. Traffic Engineering and Control 47(7):268-72". The above URL summarizes the paper as:

> A study of three locations in New Hampshire, New York and Washington state where roundabouts replaced traffic signals or stop signs found an 89 percent average reduction in vehicle delays and a 56 percent average reduction in vehicle stops.

That URL then goes on to say:

> Because roundabouts improve the efficiency of traffic flow, they also reduce vehicle emissions and fuel consumption. Installing roundabouts in place of traffic signals or stop signs has been found to reduce carbon monoxide emissions by 15-45 percent, nitrous oxide emissions by 21-44 percent, carbon dioxide emissions by 23-37 percent and hydrocarbon emissions by 0-42 percent. 6, 11, 12 Constructing roundabouts in place of traffic signals or stop signs reduced fuel consumption by an estimated 23-34 percent. 6, 11, 13

and

> A 2005 Institute study documented missed opportunities to improve traffic flow and safety at 10 urban intersections suitable for roundabouts where either traffic signals were installed or major modifications were made to 10 intersections with signals. 14 It was estimated that the use of roundabouts instead of traffic signals at these intersections would have reduced vehicle delays by 62-74 percent.

Sounds to me like existing roundabouts at least competitive to state-of-the-art experimental smart traffic signals ... and have the advantage of working even when the power goes out, and don't require more expertise in order to maintain.
Dustin Moscovitz makes this argument about what the only good reason is to start a company. (http://startupclass.samaltman.com/courses/lec01/). IMO, it should apply to the first ~20 employees too.