skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I see your point and I agree.

For myself, I try to limit myself to the mathematical apparatus I feel comfortable with. I know that if I were to open a statistics textbook, I could find something to plug in my estimates and reach a conclusion, and I'm pretty sure the conclusion would be bullshit. I learned it the hard way in high school - I remember the poor results of trying to solve math and physics homework assignments on topics I didn't understand yet. The mistakes were often subtle, but devastating.
There seem to be two opposed predictions of the effects of the SDC.

In your view, shared by many technocrats, is that the SDC solves the negative problems of cars now: time now spent driving in an SDC can be spent reading, working, having breakfast, ... there's also the reasonable assumption that future cars will be electric, so the negative environmental effects of suburbs will be reduced. And SDCs will use the road more efficiently, reducing congestion, be safer, etc.. etc.. The way people lead their lives is more or less the same, but the SDC makes it better.

Many urbanists hold - paradoxically - the opposite view. The SDC will kill the suburb. They assume that the SDC will operate on a rental model. SDC's will basically be taxis. The reasoning is, that when people no longer own a car, they have no need for a garage. So why live somewhere that is completely designed for cars? Parking minimums will no longer be required and safer (and slower) SV traffic will make being out&about on a bike or two feet much more pleasant. The quality of city living, in other words, will hugely improve because we don't need to dedicate so much effort/time/money in storing and maintaining a car. Cities can be scaled around humans again, and not around cars sitting idle for 90% of the time. The role that suburbs serve - a place that's convenient to own a car - will no longer be necessary. Plus, the SDC does not really solve the major problem of the suburb; the long term financial commitment (public&private) to maintain the infrastructure required to support sprawl.

Both are positive predictions, so win-win?

The outcome will probably be somewhere in between, but IMO the SDC won't save the suburb. The popularity of the suburbs is particular to certain historical factors that likely will not repeat; (1) urban renewal and the willful destruction of downtowns to accommodate cars, (2) school flight of young families. For (1), only the old guard in fly-over country still thinks more infrastructure is better. They're almost dead. And (2) has been played out. City schools can only improve, and suburban schools will lose their competitive advantage once the affluent start moving back closer to downtown.

I also expect the real effect of the SDC will not be felt in the trendy coastal cities where urbanity was preserved. It will happen in all the mid-size metros where the core has emptied out and ended up basically 95% strip mall. For example, drive-till-you-qualify is hilariously irrelevant in many US metros. A lot of opportunity for an inversion of the dynamics.
Robert Scoble has some great tips that have worked for me. I'd recommend checking them out. http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/robert-scobles-22-tips...
That’s just mismanagement still.

Each component should have a clearly and strictly defined way to interact with other components, which you should have in nice diagrams. Tack the diagrams together, and you get a full definition of how the newsfeed interacts and which piece does what.

If that is not possible, then you have a very badly managed company, not even Healthcare.gov was that mismanaged.
> I doubt the security problems are huge. Most userland apps run as a dedicated user.

There are tons of security holes that aren't prevented by running under separate users. I remember examples where sensitive data was being stored in the clear, where other apps could get to it.
There are two things, one trivial and one non-trivial, that would vastly improve the feed for me (and I imagine for a certain cohort of which I am a member):

The trivial one: Allow me to turn off all links. All of them, globally. I don't care about the news article you just saw that reinforces your political views; I don't care about the clickbait editorial you just read; I don't even care about the moderately interesting piece you just shared because I probably already saw it on Twitter. No links. Just the pictures and status updates like before the age of inline expand.

The non-trivial one: Allow me to turn off all images with text in them. Why? Because these are, with stunningly high frequency, visual versions of the same political-view-reinforcement article links. I already know if a friend or family member identifies as a liberal or a conservative. I don't need a regular stream of smug SomeEECards or Memegenerator pictures to remind me. On the technical side, there's clearly some fuzziness, but I have to think simply detecting the presence of text would be a comparatively simple task to what else Facebook's deep learning systems do.
Withholding known security vulnerabilities from the public in order to be later used for hacking is immoral and dangerous.

I was thinking about this when Anonymous "hacked" thousands of ISIS twitter accounts. On the one hand that saves Twitter from having to make a stand themselves - but if they didn't immediately plug those holes, they're leaving legitimate users at risk.
Both. You would be surprised how much one can know in most of the fields and
still be focused on one or two domains.
Sure that's possible, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9503329/is-there-any-way-...

Ofcourse people can(and do) sell their server logs to 3. parties anyway...
This article is extremely interesting, but it seems to be equating success in interview decision with competent performance at the job, which has not actually been established yet. It is interesting though to see which components of pre- and early-interview evaluation ended up being related to the decision to hire.
I've conducted a lot of programming interviews over the past three decades. I think that it's easier to do at places like Google where the objective is to avoid a Type I (false positive) error and it's expected that a lot of time and money will be spent to identify the best hires. It's harder in other contexts where Type II errors matter more.

I have a big portfolio of technical questions, but I usually stick to a small set that I consider to be well calibrated by posing them to smart coworkers and seeing what they do with them.

I've found, counterintuitively, that the best indicators are the questions that deal with "programming in the small", such as coming up with a predicate expression to describe a test for a simple relationship between a few values, because either you can do it easily or you can't do it at all. And programming in the large depends on a lot of cases of programming in the small.
High Speed Design
Thanks for your advice!

For 1, that's a great idea and I really need the exercise. But it's ruled out for 4 months of the year due to northern temperatures. I have a very low tolerance for cold, so if there's snow outside, it's extremely unpleasant, tears up my throat, paradoxically burns my hands and ears, etc. Can overdress to compensate, but even then it's still unpleasant and slippery outside.

For 2, I'd love to read more in general. But I have absolutely no imagination, and get lost in side thoughts. I'll find out after having read six pages that I had zoned out and don't remember a single thing I read. Maybe that's okay if I'm just trying to fall asleep. I think I'll give this suggestion a try with my "Making Sense of Japanese" book ;)

For 3, won't the blue light from the TV cause someone to stay awake? I heard it disrupts the body's production of melatonin, because it think it's daylight.
Still doesn't call out parent's point because Java is a bad example for both of you. It's a behemoth compared to safer, systems languages with a history of performance problems. Original was something like 10-15x slower than C.

A proper comparison would be to something like Component Pascal, Modula-2/3, Ada, Fortran for numeric algorithms, and so on. Their results were high performance with higher correctness and predictable behavior. So, parent's point stands and so does mine that only C's bad design and culture lead to relying on undefined behavior for performance. They could just as easily optimize from well-defined semantics into assembly like the other languages mostly did.
klond.c? Well, it is Klondike Solitaire.
Top 100 Personal Development Blogs – 2016
It took me a while to understand why Certificate Transparency is sound without requiring proof-of-work, and Bitcoin is not, but the answer turns out to be fairly simple: you can merge two CT log entries without conflicts, but you can't merge two Bitcoin transactions. If I want to log "Certificate A exists for bitcoin.org" and you want to log "Certificate B exists for mtgox.com", both of our data items are valid on their own (and can be independently verified, just by checking the signature on the cert) and the ordering doesn't matter. So as soon as a write goes to some log server, as long as I trust the log server to propagate writes via the gossip protocol, I'm done; I don't need to care about merges or retries. (Also, it's possible for the log server to send me a signed promise to propagate writes, that I can later use to prove its misbehavior if that entry never shows up.)

On the other hand, if I have a transaction "Transfer 1 BTC to bitcoin.org" and you have a transaction "Transfer 1 BTC to mtgox.com", they don't necessarily commute or merge because of the double-spend problem: they might both be trying to spend the same 1 BTC.

There are a number of nifty decentralized systems you can build that don't have to think about double-spend problem, where all transactions commute/merge. Associating names with public keys seems to be one of them, as long as you allow a name to be validly bound to multiple keys. (A Keybase-style binding of external service usernames to public keys would permit this, since you simply have multiple valid Keybase proofs; the external usernames are arbitrated by the various centralized services. A Namecoin-style approach doesn't, since names are first-come-first-serve, and you don't want multiple people to be served the same name.)

There appear to be ways to make a money-transfer system avoid the double-spend problem: as I understand Stellar, it simply just makes the spending account legitimately owe both people money (and puts limits on how much each link can transfer at a time, so that the money is actually recoverable). But for non-money-transfer systems, if you can arrange your problem statement such that double-spending isn't a concern in the first place, you can use regular Merkle trees and avoid the entire proof-of-work overhead.
Twitter could charge 1¢ for each character over 140. That will encourage people to (still) be concise, but also monetize people (or companies) that want to say more.
Ghana’s market women were once so powerful they were targeted by the military
RxAndroid and Kotlin (Part 1)
Experimented more - it appears to be strongly influenced by facial expression. If I have a straight face, I'm hmm or OK. If I scowl, I'm nice. If I grin like an axe-wielding maniac, I'm stunning.

Then again, that bears up in reality. People who smile are perceived as more attractive.
That is pretty cool =) - I've just had a skim of your IndieGoGo page (good luck with that), and it certainly looks interesting.

I suspect you're catering to a certain market (i.e. those willing to fork out either 450 EUR and put up with some rough edges, or willing to setup the VM themselves), but I applaud your effort. Good on you mate.
> In the EU, net contributors seem to have something awfully close to an effective veto regarding minor issues,

Do you have a source for this? I never got this impression. Some countries have proportionally large influence due to their size, namely France and Germany. Some others due to the high quality diplomats and politicians they send to Europe, such as Belgium and Italy.

Some countries actively sabotage their own influence in the EU, by showing nothing but hostility and obstruction (UK), or by using the EU as a kind of retirement plan for politicians and diplomats that failed domestically (Netherlands). Always echoing the German point of view should not be seen as "an effective veto", it is essentially an attempt to stay in favor with their formerly close, powerful friend to the east, who has been getting less and less interested over the years, as his attention shifts towards the East.
Sweaty January and how gyms make money
Redesigning a fragmented date format
I have submitted several papers for double-blind peer review. (I work in the systems side of computer science.) My rule is that I will not weaken a paper through the double-blind process - that is, even if saying this paper builds on prior work may give enough information to out me or my co-authors, I still do it. I still say what system we used, and say it builds on previous work, but I pretend that that work was done by someone else.

In practice, someone who really wants to break the double-blind veil probably can. But I don't think that's a problem, as very few people are consciously biased, and will actively seek out such identifying information. By removing names and affiliations, and pretending all of our work was done by someone else, I think that's enough to help people avoid unconscious bias.
He used an example. He didn't call every left-wing party literally Communist. Classic HN pedantry.
thank you for sharing this
Pfizer and America’s Corporate Exodus
Certainly. Just because you can name a theorem doesn't mean you can derive it either. The article had no actual computation or derivation of the theorem. Instead, it talked about beliefs and other things that don't really exist (in regards to the computation of a probability value).
2015 NFL Predictions
It does feel like Internet security depends on the software equivalent of Shōji doors, windows and dividers. We need some stronger construction. No offense to traditional Japanese architecture intended. It's just descriptive.
But they'll interview for free? They don't need to be large contributions (and if small changes require too much time, that becomes a natural filter).
Here's a (giant) png screenshot of the whole reddit thread: http://mirror.xwl.me/solitaire_history.png

Screenshot captured with phantomjs/rasterize.js and shrunk with pngquant.
Yep, I had 9mcg/ml or whatever it was. Was supposed to be 50, but I was at 9.

I've been taking 1000% Vitamin D3 daily for the past eight months or so. Also occasionally take calcium (for heartburn) and magnesium. I think it did ultimately help with some bad chest pains I was experiencing, but a lot of that has also just been acclimation to them. Haven't gotten another blood test to see what I'm at now, because even with my insurance, the out of pocket charge for the last visit was over $1000.

Has not really helped with sleeping, though. I hear natural UV light is supposedly a lot better than D3 supplements. There was a good TED talk on how that helped people's cardiovascular health as well, whereas supplements did not. But all the "sun lamps" filter out the UV for the risk of skin cancer. The only actual UV ones I can find are meant for reptiles (lizards, turtles) or cost $1000+ >_>
None of you are thinking about class.

To you, this is a technical problem with a technical solution. Just a math problem. “How do we align incentives?” “How do we set the tax rate to maximize productivity and growth?” etc. As though simply increasing the number of startups and corporate wealth in the world will eventually eliminate scarcity and poverty. No big changes necessary, just keep up the good work and the great Polynomial Curve of Technology will propel us to the end of history.

Some of you are more proactive. We should “attack poverty.” Like it’s a disease, and we can “science the shit out of it” and find a cure. But poverty, and disequal distribution generally are not diseases - unpleasant but inexorable byproducts of our evolution - they are inextricable from our political economy. Why? Because we have a society that is stratified by class! Our capitalist economy does solve the problem of distributing resources to everybody (though not equally or fairly, and not without wrecking the planet), and of creating new resources, new products, driving progress, but it also serves the crucial purpose of maintaining class power.

Given the massive forward surge in productivity over the last 50 years, why do most of us now work more and earn less? Surely this isn’t the only way it could be. Even Keynes, the liberal economist thought we’d be working 15 hour weeks by now. So why don’t we?

It’s because we’re in the working class, and the working class serves the ruling class. It’s not in their interest for us to work 15 hour weeks, and they’re in charge, so we don’t. That’s really all. Until working people have some democratic control over the economy, we’ll always work more and earn less, and wealth will accumulate at the top, because that’s what this system is designed to do. And it works.

Our world is not billions of people on equal footing, freely exchanging goods and labor. It’s not woodworking artisans crafting chairs and selling them to each other. It’s owners and workers. Sure you can start a startup. Make a great app that coordinates precarious workers to take out SF yuppies’ garbage for them (yep, that’s a real one!), and transition from worker to owner. Great. You made it. That’s certainly not the norm though, and it certainly won’t eradicate poverty or scarcity. An on a human scale, it’s hardly progress. We used to have a space program, remember? We can do better than capitalism. Anyway we better, or we’re screwed.
This is at least the fifth time I can count that linode has been hacked, really? Maybe it's time to ditch that coldfusion stack?

Edit:

1.The bitcoin hacks, March 2012

2.HTP hack, April 15, 2013 (CF exploit)

3.Second HTP hack April 16, 2013 (Another CF exploit)

4.MySQL server that allowed anonymous logins (?!?!) January 19, 2014

5.This hack

I'm not counting their domain name and various other parts of their infrastructure provided by third parties being compromised, but if I was the list would be significantly longer.
well, is it wrong...?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: an un-nervingly large amount of the work I've done over the years has had this property: the long-term value is inversely proportional to the time put into it. Learning from this correlation remains a big priority for me.
You can just add a .json at the end of any url on Reddit to get a JSON object of the page.

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3zfadv/til_t...

Maybe this will help?
You should probably know what James Flynn thinks of the Flynn effect. He doesn't try to escape the conclusions of an I.Q. test as much as extend them, despite some of the "paradoxes".
This entire article is ~954 characters, less than 1/10th of the proposed 10,000 maximum.
GreenWave ocean farming model scoops $100,000 sustainability prize
It forces people to not write a complex English sentence, is what it does. You literally can't express complex thought without multi-tweeting. Which is annoying.

There's concision, and then there's nuking the concept of the paragraph.

I for one welcome our new longer-Tweet overlords.
The 5 Key Aspects of a Top Trading Computer
But it doesn’t lead to any meaningful discussions.

I’ve tried using twitter for some time now, and you end up sounding a lot more angry when you spend the 20 minutes trying to get your thoughts into 140 characters, and you’ll have to use a horrendous amount of abbreviations.

There’s no space left for polite "hey, sorry, I disagree with your thoughts on [long name of a project], I’d think you could do [feature] better if you’d look at adopting [technology]", there’s only "[project’s feature] is bad, would be better with [technology]".

Especially when you try to use German, you write half a sentence and the box is full.

Same with imgur comments, I frequently end up writing "1/12" as prefix to my comments – at that point it’s useless.
The thing is: who leaves at 5pm? It's 8:15pm and I am still here (OK, I work in an office, but still). I think working from home you can get free time simply being more productive. I know I would do that. At work, you have to be there, even just to wait that your boss is finished with task A, so that he can finalize task B with you. Then you have the commute, mine is 90 minutes per day.

Bottom line: I don't have time, I get home very tired, the work I do could be done in less time or better distributed through the day.
Okay what's differentiating Twitter from fucking Facebook now?

Only the facts that there's (currently) no policy against pseudonyms, bots and multiple accounts and that there's no useless crap games like Farmville.
I have, it's quite nice. Didn't have enough to try it for sleeping. But it's not obtainable at all here. I'm not the kind of person who knows how to make those connections to obtain it on the black market either. Everyone who seems to know how to get it is also hopelessly unreliable, go figure. I'll just have to hold out hope that my state will join the other four US states that legalized it by 2050 or so.
Which also reminds me that Wes itself mentioned a "boss key" that was removed before the game was released. Hopefully things are better nowadays.
Yes, there is that risk, and no doubt many fall for it. Ego / self-esteem issues may be a big part of it. But then again, every worthy goal poses risks. When you fly a plane, there's a greater risk you'll kill yourself than when you stay on the ground, and yet airplanes are being flown and we're reaping great benefits from it.

RE IQ, personally, I'm 100% confused on the topic. I used to believe that Flynn effect is basically people getting better at doing tests, but recently I heard that someone controlled for that and the effect remained. So I don't know. The topic is complicated and most of studies I heard of are the kind of psychology and social science I implicitly assume is mostly bullshit.
Also, I feel like "Tweetstorm" are also closer to the raw metal of how people actually think out loud (or at least anecdotally how I tend to think out loud), building from the last thought a small fragment at a time. To some extent that's what I appreciate about Twitter is sometimes capturing the raw point-to-point (scattered) thought process over blogs where one has a tendency to expand, revisit, and rewrite, obscuring the thought process but building a better narrative in the result.

I like the idea of going back, "merging tweets" into a collection, and then writing a narrative on top of it, connecting dots and building revisions that complete it as a "post". I guess kind of like Storify.
You might be replying to the wrong comment by mistake as I listed a number of reasons people might like an open ISA and reference implementation. That OEM's will repackage it for those purposes doesn't contradict what I said.
Road to Growth – Ep. #5, with Quboles Marcy Campbell
The LessWrong folks aren’t obviously better or worse at calculating priors than anyone else. The “problem” is that their hobby is spending their free time considering outlandish scenarios, inventing arbitrary assumptions related to such scenarios, drawing questionable conclusions, and then convincing themselves that because they used logic and math, their analysis must be correct. Plenty of other folks who spend time on similar activities with a less pseudo-rigorous framing end up as conspiracy theorists or occultists; belief in AI overlords ruling humanity, the technological singularity, cryogenics, or impending 1000-year human lifespans is far from the kookiest thing people convince themselves about.
Medium doesn’t know what it is yet, but Facebook and Twitter both want to be it
I thought OpenOffice was a trick to make you beg for Microsoft Word back.

It says it right their on their web site: "Help Spread the Word"!

http://www.openoffice.org/download/