skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"For we got rid of things like having slaves be counted as 3/5 of a person of representation."

Just in case you didn't know, the "a slave is 3/5 of a person" that is so oft-decried today was an anti-slavery measure. For the purposes of Congressional representation, if a slave was counted as a full person, then the slave-owning states would get expanded numbers in Congress for all the non-voters being kept in slavery. Three-fifths, as opposed to full representation, at least kept them from gaining as much power as they would have otherwise. These things generally aren't as simple as one is often told.
> Are Instagram and Photoshop an adequate substitute for real life film grain?

I thought you were making a good point about how filters were shitty needless imitations and then you threw it all out most unexpectedly.
Can you find me an influential LessWrongian who describes making emotional decisions based on greed as "rational"?

Based on my reading, a profit seeker obeying his gut and losing money is irrational. In contrast, a social justice type observing that assortative mating causes inequality and therefore attempting to reduce educated women's marriage choices is rational. But maybe you've read more than me, and can figure out what I missed?

And so, the idea that the rigid set of discursive boundaries that LessWrongians impose upon themselves may favor a political outcome (the status quo)...

This is a completely new critique of the Less Wrong crowd. The normal critique, and the specific one you cited, claim that Less Wrong is too far from the status quo and concerns itself with things like the singularity.

Adding to my confusion is that in the very post you criticize, Yudkowsky explicitly advocates fixing intelligence deficits with "sufficiently advanced technology, biotech or nanotech". How is fixing every person with an IQ < 150 using nanotechnology remotely preserving the status quo?

(Note also that Yudkowsky is explicitly advocating that if genius isn't uniformly distributed, as social justice types claim to believe, we should explicitly change the world to make it so.)
I agree. But it's about politics, lobbyists, and money.
What is it with all the comments about the service being for "elitist" or the "1%"?

People are paying for a convenient service - nothing special about it. Some pay the neighbors kid $20 to mow the lawn, others pay Magic $100 to get something done that would otherwise be a hassle for them. Same shit.
Google's self-driving technology is real, but the car itself is vaporware
The 5.1 earthquake for this bomb would suggest a smaller explosion than the bombs at the tail end of WW2, however that depends on a lot of things. Looking at this list it would suggest about a ~600 ton explosion http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/richter_magnitude_scale
The Breathtaking Future of a Connected World
"Reviewers often are in competition with the authors of the papers they're reviewing, hence the term peer-review. They have an incentive to prevent publication of competing work."

This seems backwards to me. There isn't a fixed amount of interest in a field that is captured by peers. If others in your industry are getting attention then it draws attention to your industry as a whole. I'd think reviewers would be biased towards having competing work published not against.
From what I understand, the right to bear arms was inclusive of nearly any weapon. There were interesting discussions (at the time) with regards to whether the 2nd Amendment included the right to bear warship, cannon, or repeating rifles. They concluded that it did.

Furthermore, I don't understand why the ease (or lack thereof) of a militia (the present day equivalent for which may be a State Guard) to overtake or resist the (exponentially larger) Federal government has any bearing on our rights. You wouldn't use this sort of argument anywhere else.
Is there any reason to believe they actually tested an H Bomb? Wouldn't that be a pretty big leap from low-yield atom bombs? It seems like the only evidence it was thermonuclear is that the North Korean government said so, and they're not exactly reliable.

Meanwhile, CNN is proclaiming "N. KOREA TESTS H-BOMB" on their front page, which is a pretty far cry from them claiming to have tested one.
Cooking Fever Hack Tool Android No Survey
I know this, and even refer to that fact in my argument. It's not clear to me what you're trying to say.
I think your opinion is valid and should be fairly represented, but consider that your reasons for not caring about privacy may be flawed or inconsistent.

Assuming that you don't care about privacy because you're apathetic, do you also not care about free speech because you don't say anything controversial? Do you care about your right to assembly even if you don't protest anything? As an extreme example upon which to build a baseline, would you mind if a neighbor had unmitigated access to watching you lounge in your underwear, take a shower or have sex?

Why do you not care about privacy? Do you feel that you don't need it because you have nothing to hide, or are you willing to sacrifice it for some greater good (e.g. terrorism etc.)? Are you merely indifferent or do you aggressively oppose the concept?
I am not advocating for true equality. I am saying that we can distribute wealth to better represent how people contribute to the system. No one is at the top without the support of the millions who pushed them there. Everyone is not ambitious in the business sense. Everyone can't be Michael Jordan, but Michael Jordan wouldn't be with everyone.
Agree, it's a democratic republic which is unique. It blends and contrasts the best and worst of the two, historically acceptable methods of governing and keeps the two locked in a permanent struggle; with the inevitable hope that it strengthens the country over the longest tests of time.
Forcing CES 2016 Crew to Exercise While They Blog
Do you have curtains in your house?
Great concept, but why just images? It should be comparatively trivial to enhance it to accept text files, PDFs, etc. I hope the 4KB limit target didn't mean an artificial limitation on the feature set.
I think you mean "I don't care about my privacy at this moment". These are very different ideas. Or would you not care about your privacy if you visited a country where reading HN content was illegal? Or would you not care about the privacy of someone denouncing some government wrong doing? Or if someone started harassing you because of the things they found out you're doing?

There are plenty of cases where privacy are important, even if you think they don't currently apply to you.
Without a clear correlation with better outcomes, I don't see why you would support strict gun control. It seems like you'd be adding complexity and technicality to the system, but admitting that it's pointless.
Most things the answer isn't "No", but "Okay, this service will do it for $huge_number. Is that okay?"

Will it cure cancer for you? No. But if it can get you the best care available, that seems like a reasonable response.
Yeah but they just picked a few examples, there are many more. There are tons of things that work in Japan that would never work in the USA, because people are just generally better citizens there.
You can tell a lot about a person from his bookshelves and I know this is a guy after my own heart.

He has almost every non-fiction book on my Goodreads list: Books Scientists Should Read Before The Age Of 20. https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/75031.Books_Scientists_S...

Forget Amazon recommendations: this is the basis for my 2016 reading list.

Thanks for those that have worked hard to list the books!
Yeah you're no different.
Always had it on my list to build a prototype of the concept and pitch it to media companies. Baffles me that they do so much work plugging Twitter handles for newsreaders, journalists, etc but then use a platform that hardly helps them.
What about the impacts of all all-knowing government in the future?

10 years from now a new government is voted in, and they severely dislike people with your political views based on some online comments you made in 2016. They could do anything from just making it really hard for you to vote, all the way to getting you fired, pulling your mortgage out from under you, etc. etc.

You really have no idea what a future government or corporation will do with so much data about you. Based on history, I think it's best to assume it won't be good for you.
Is flux trying to sell you something? I thought their software was free.
"You agree that the existence and terms of this Addendum and the Private Pricing Program are not publicly known and constitute AWS Confidential Information under the Agreement."

Maybe they're milking your investors. Maybe you've built some absurd contraption that they know you won't be able to move elsewhere. Or maybe you need to hire a better negotiator.
Easy tips to improve back pain
It is very tough to resist making an ad hominem attack on Ken Kratz.
Wouldn't this cause some kind of an earthquake that's detectable?
Yes, they both use the same PRNG construction, that's in the article I linked to. But the blocking behavior of /dev/random does give it information-theoretic security, because an attacker with unlimited computational power can't predict its output, assuming they don't know the outputs of the entropy sources you are using, assuming that your entropy estimates are accurate or conservative. And we use /dev/urandom because information-theoretic security in our RNG does not improve actual system security.
This issue always boils down to the LOTR argument for me: the surveillance power is too great, and no individual or group can or should be trusted with it, regardless of its actual current or potential future benefits.

The crux of the debate then is where to draw the line between safe and unsafe amounts of power?
Many have done things that were common place in the past and are not anymore; or are plain illegal; or were found to be wrong. Sustaining something just because many people still do it doesn't really seem reasonable.
Why do you doubt that?

As a counter data point, the police chief of Detroit recently advised the city's residents to carry guns for their protection. The reaction on right-wing blogs which covered this was applause.
I grew up in a county with 1 police officer on duty at night that was 50 miles by 30 miles having a gun felt like a necessity. I now live in NYC and it does not.
grep "I've been working on a startup"
Yes, but the blade RF only goes down to 400 MHz, so will not cover the 2M ham band.
What I would like to see is "What if Bob only invested using advice from the interwebs?"
Here are the major announcements you missed at CES 2016
After Decades of Neglect, Functional Programming Is Going Mainstream Why Now?
Is it really mutual destruction if North Korea has nothing to lose ?
Adjusted for inflation, he ends up with 480k relative to his original investment.
One for me, one for my wife
As I stated in the sibling comment, Stemcentrx is indeed much more reasonable than either Theranos or Nootrobox. However, a $5B valuation is still absurdly optimistic when you consider the comps. There have been massive setbacks at Verastem even after getting to phase 2[0], and Verastem's science originated from a top MIT research lab.

0: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/09/28/verastem-sha...
"reintroduced"
What drives me crazy about things like this is the law passes Dec 18th and you have to buy equipment by Dec 31st to take advantage of this in 2015. Every year congress waits until the very last minute to set tax code which makes it impossible to actually plan for purchases as a small business.
> Q: How quickly will I get what I want after requesting it?

> As soon as possible.

So... it's not magic.

At their price point, it's only worth using the service if you have huge amounts of disposable income or your request is near impossible to fulfill on your own. It's basically a service that answers the question, "How much are you willing to spend to do X?" Where the amount is determined by them after the fact.
Ask HN: What is your experience with Parse's BAAS in production?
Hello HN'ers,

I am about to launch an app that is using Parse's backend and Notifications service. I am interested in knowing your experience with Parse. Do you have any app/website in production that uses Parse's services? What is your experience from stability perspective and Cost perspective? Any surprises? Have you moved (or thinking of moving) away from Parse for any reason? Please share.
It depends on what their calculus is.

Getting to play in the south China sea at the expense of instability in east Asia is probably not the bargain they are after.

NK is to China what the sidekick is to the strongman. or the Capo to the Godfather. He's insufferable and creates you headaches, and provides diversion, but he's your sidekick... except if you go to far one day, it'll be goodbye.
Or on purpose since since the blue messages are meant to look better with the UI so that you prefer using iMessage when possible.
It has been detected as a 5.1

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/asia/north-korea-seismic-event...
Yes, USGS has detected it. The question is whether it was a nuke or conventional explosive or something else.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us10004bnm#...
The comparison to Australia is an interesting one. Another interesting comparison is to Mexico, where federal law bans gun ownership for average citizens.

http://tijuana.usconsulate.gov/tijuana/warning.html

It doesn't seem like they've been able to keep a lid on them in that country though.

Personally, I'm not against new, strict gun control laws. As far as I'm concerned, they could require a twelve year waiting period to buy a water pistol. I don't care.

But, what surprises me is that people believe, after witnessing the US's long term attempt to control drugs, that it would actually be able to control guns.

It just does not seem plausible to me.

What am I missing here? How could stricter gun control laws be successfully enforced in the US? Wouldn't people defy the laws and obtain guns just like they do illegal drugs?
Me too, and I like to work with small and old computers too, and for similar reasons.

The thing is, if a tune is really good, that it was done on SID won't matter. It's good art.

Not better in an objective sense, just something we crave.
people are saying it's likely that it was a boosted bomb instead (deadly but far far cry from a proper h-bomb)

and cnn is as usual profiting off FUD
As a newbie dev, I'm happy to see that even experts have difficulty navigating third-party code!
Presuming we get its value function correct: any number of things that will have the net effect of no one ever dying again, and by extension no one having the capability to harm others, in addition to immediately eliminating almost every existential risk to humanity as a whole. The least imaginative possibility I can think of involves switching everyday reality over from physical matter to computation; no matter what happens in that computation, the sentient beings interacting with it cannot be harmed.

Many of the folks thinking about and working on solutions to existential risk consider AI pretty much the universal solution (and, at the same time, consider unfriendly AI one of the notable existential threats).
As example purestorage.com is all ssd storage with inline compression/dedupe and quotes 5-10x reduction on VM's.
It's sad to see the level of discussion and civility of hacker news be reduced to "constitution nuts" that adds nothing to your argument and detracts from the overall quality of the discussion.
The article is about wealth redistribution. That is completely orthogonal to the question of real value vs scam.
This is mine. http://i.imgur.com/9KuR1Hz.jpg
Somehow I'm not surprised. Is there not some strangeness in the fact that each of their branding borrow from respective national languages?
Why Programs Should Be Shared
Because computers will somehow be more noble than human beings.

Wait, that doesn't make sense.
Maybe not worthwhile for you, but there's a set of people out there who all agree on what Evil actually is (generally, obviously it's difficult to be exact), and we'd like to try and figure out how to limit its ability to act, while maintaining the shield of protection for the persecuted.
>That's obviously false.

No it isn't. The culture shock for a westerner is no more than you'd find going to any other country in the far east. Sure, you'll find it less in countries with which you share a cultural heritage. That's sort of obvious and irrelevant. Is Japan any weirder than China, or Vietnam, or Thailand? No.

>From the mere fact that you can go back and find your laptop you left for a couple of hours in a public square...

Not actually true. At least, not true enough that you'd want to chance it in real life.

>...attitudes towards work

Less foreign to me than attitudes in most of Europe.

>...marriage

Not strange at all.

>parents

Only strange if you'd never been anywhere else in Asia.

>individualism

Again, no more foreign to me as much of Europe.

>size of the average house

That's just Tokyo. And London, too, for that matter.

>That's not how it works. It's not a simple act of deducting people. The demographic changes that would have be in work for decades to make the population shrink by 35 million would also mean that the remaining 90 million million will be much older (in average) than back in the past when they were 90 million again, and this also has effects in society, economy, pension systems, etc.

Which I didn't think I had to spell out. Yes, it will cause some difficulties. No, that doesn't mean they can't take it in stride. Again, Japan is a wealthy country, and these are problems that can be papered over with wealth.

Will Japan's GDP be smaller as a result? Sure. Does it matter? No. What matters is GDP per capita.
I don't think it's a cultural difference between states, I think it's a legal line drawn between homicide vs justifiable homicide.

I'd like to see charting of both, because justifiable homicide is an indicator of danger in an area too. Unsuccessful attempts at violent crime resulting in justifiable homicide by firearm.

That's one obvious problem is you know that any partisan journalist can take justifiable homicides, lump them into the same bucket under gun deaths by murder and use it to reinforce a message of guns = violence. It's disingenuous.

Same thing with other crime. An area could say rapes decreased, even if attempted rapes went up. So it seems successful self-defense literally and figuratively means you won't become a statistic. Which is bad when you want an accurate picture of the safeness of an area.

No buyers agent can say, "Oh yeah this area is really safe, hardly any crime happens to people here, so long as you're open carrying a glock 19 and are an expert in Krav Maga."
What does cost have to do with anything? We're talking about its ability to do what it claims.
Yes, this was the solution Magic used.

This is what I appreciate about Magic, by the way. I simply asked for food from the restaurant, specifying that leftovers were fine. Chilled overnight didn't even occur to me; I did not have any idea at the time how they might accomplish it, and I was prepared to be told it was impossible (or insanely expensive).

They figured out that chilled overnight delivery was possible, and got a local service to handle the logistics of picking it up from the restaurant, packing it into the box, and shipping it. It turned out rather nicely, and not nearly as expensive as I expected. It's not even really that much work and effort, when all is said and done.
Whenever I read this or similar, i end up wondering how many gun aficionados will have stumps for hands in the near future?

Unwanted opinion time: slap ammunition with a $250/ round tariff. Track sales more tightly than we currently do for sudafed. Let people load their own - and go back to my original point, but more likely blindness. (Of course there are competent home gunsmiths for whom neither would apply.
Unfortunately, if that happened, I'm pretty sure the only possible endgame is a scorched sky and humans as living batteries.
Nuclear weapons aren't primarily a threat to the planet, they're a threat to densely populated cities.

Five countries detonated 2,000 nukes over 35 years. You could simultaneously set off every existing nuclear warhead inside of Wyoming and it would have a negligible health impact on most of the rest of humanity. You couldn't come even remotely close to killing everyone with nukes, unless the global arsenals were vastly expanded; the US alone has 27,000 cities. Russia's entire stockpile could kill at worst 1/3 of all Americans, assuming they all worked properly and hit their targets. The notion that nuclear war could end the human race, is entirely a myth (which is not to downplay the actual damage such would cause).
When reading studies like this, it's very helpful to look at the tables of regression coefficients rather than just reading text. Unfortunately, it can often be a career limiting move for study text to accurately reflect the contents of the data tables/regression coefficients.

The first source you cited (the rand study) shows that being African American is a strong predictor of engaging in violence, even after accounting for other factors. See table 2.

The second study doesn't address the question.

The third study (see table 2) shows that, among other factors, percentage of a city that is black is a strong predictor of violent crime even after accounting for other factors.

One productive line of thought which leads from "something inherent to blackness causes crime" is "since this problem is intractible with current levels of biotechnology/social engineering/etc, we should stop wasting resources trying to solve it and focus on other things."
Came here to complain about this so I upvoted you instead. It would be great, too, if their search could actually show posts.. My usual go-to when I'm trying to find something again is to go to the person's profile, but sometimes I forget who posted it and in that case there's basically no hope in finding the post again...
Listen to the audio of the event:

http://ds.iris.edu/ds/nodes/dmc/tools/event/5170265

http://ds.iris.edu/ds/nodes/dmc/tools/event/
I think you're being more than a little unfair.

Part of the problem is that there simply isn't as much money to be made in digital as there was in analog. A digital camera doesn't need film, but film (and film processing) accounted for much of Kodak's profits for many years. So it's not just a simple matter of "make digital cameras instead of analog ones".

Also, remember that Kodak was very big into digital imaging, and was considered the leader in the field of high-end digital cameras. That is, until the Nikon D1 came along around 1999. Even then, Kodak sensors were common among the next few generations of DSLRs.
Surely the first hydrogen bomb was constructed in 1952, not 1958?
I kind of get the idea of what you are trying to say, but actually reading your post reads like a bunch of non-sequiturs.

North Korea not having a nuclear weapon is so much more important than nobody having one, that the two discussions have virtually nothing to do with each other.

It's not one is just a slightly greater degree than the other, they are so different they are not even in the same ballpark.

And what does having just one planet have at all to do with nuclear weapons? I'm not seeing the connection. All the nuclear bombs on earth would do nothing whatsoever to the planet, and barely anything to the inhabitants except for a minority of them.

And then the sudden jump to strong AI? Hu? That came out of nowhere.

You imply that strong AI has some sort of connection to "everyone killed", first of all, how exactly would everyone get killed anyway? Humans don't have the ability to do that, not today.

And strong AI would, if anything, make it easier to do that, not harder.

So your post really is quite perplexing if you actually read it.