skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's just a matter of perspective, really. There are problems to be solved aplenty in the 'rich' countries (where the wealth is anything but equally spread). This takes time and other resources and when you're young those problems can seem overwhelming.

So the right response is to change your viewpoint to one where the problems you are confronted with match your abilities to solve them, in order to get better at this so that you can solve larger problems later on (and it helps that while you're doing this you also make contact with other people who will in turn become your real-life network).

This can take a while, but that's fine. Living in India or the West would not change much in this respect but for someone that grew up in the West to go to India would likely change their perspective on life and values tremendously, just like the reverse would happen if someone from India moved to the West for a while. They'd come back a different person, and would mature a large amount in a relatively short time.
As a someone outside the US, his policies would likely make more difference to us than US citizens. And we don't get a vote.
This reminds me of how Peter Thiel said extreme pessimism and extreme optimism are both problems because they both lead to inaction. Why do anything if you believe the world is getting really good or really bad?
- You can think of error, loss, and cost functions as the same. In fact, two textbooks in front of me say that the loss function is a measure of error. If "loss" is a confusing word, think of it as the "information loss" of the model -- if your model is not perfect, you lose some of the information inherent in the data.

- There is no particular function used for error and loss. Different functions can be chosen based on the model, problem type, ease of theoretical analysis, etc. In practice, the final loss function is often experimentally determined by whatever yields the best accuracy.

- The perceptron uses a different loss function because it is a binary classifier, not a regressor. In this case, because there are only two classes (1 and -1), the loss function max(0, -xy) is 0 if x and y are the same class and 1 if they are different. Then, the error function just sums these losses together. (Note this is quite similar to MSE.)

- RMSE is also valid -- adding the square root will not affect minimization. MSE is likely more common for minor reasons, such as slightly better efficiency and cleaner theoretical proofs.
I believe a lot of the autonomous mowers also require you to lay a guidewire around the boundary of your property.
Actually, no.

When bank loans are written off, there is a corresponding removal of money from the money supply.

So the correct way to formulate this is to say: when loans are taken out from the banking system, money is created, but whether or not the money supply grows depends on the balance between new lending, vs loan repayment and loan default which both cause money to be destroyed.

Only bank loans do this btw., so if a company raises money some other way, it's money supply neutral.
That isn't the situation at all. One group of people was going to die regardless. Or was going to suffer a life-long disease. The debate is whether or not killing people that weren't going to die is worth it if your body count is lower at the end. We're not debating whether or not flipping the switch on a train track is ethical.
Man this is a confused piece of writing, but most importantly is this: "Early employees, founders or people at key positions typically hold common stock, more often without any downside protections. These people pay taxes on the options at the high valuations they are offered, often shelling out a sizeable chunk of their savings, with the probable risk of seeing their company being sold for a lot less."

Yes if you bought your common stock and paid giant amounts of tax (via AMT[1]) on that purchase, you have put yourself into the position of losing all that money. But I wonder how many people have fallen for that trap? Of course the worse case would be RSUs where your granted (not optioned) the stock and are stuck paying the AMT without any ability to sell that granted stock at the time.

Everyone who is working for a Unicorn is, in theory, drawing a reasonable salary (unreasonable to those not in the tech sector apparently) so it isn't like your life savings that your living off of are now worthless (that did happen to folks in the dot com crash).

I have had the experience of having a basket of stock and options being "worth" over $12M at one date (when I could not do anything with it) and "worth" less than $80,000 when I could sell those shares on the market. But it didn't "bankrupt me" to "lose" over $11M dollars. Because all of the value is fictional until its actualized into cash. Just like every PowerBall ticket was "worth" $900M before they picked the balls, but after they picked them it was "worth" $0. Nobody should feel like they "lost" $900M because the lottery didn't pick your numbers. Just like you don't "lose" money because your common stock is worth less when you can sell it, than it was when it was optioned to you.

[1] The US "Alternative Minimum Tax" which computes your tax rate in a fantasy universe where you actually saw the gain on the security you just bought and pay that tax as if it were real.
I don't understand what you mean by humans are really cheap, you can't upgrade a human , you can't make him faster, you can't install latest update or add some components, the main disadvantage of robots nowadays is that we have not yet achieved a human level AI that gives us the abilitiy to replace humans by robots, but if we ever do that or even achieve just good advancement in it, I strongly doubt that any "unskilled" human worker would be better or compete on the job.
Food delivery is nearly impossible to pull off, because you need to own the entire delivery chain in order to make money off of it. Instacart attempts to leverage existing chains around it, but then the prices are doubly marked up so no one wants to buy things, and replacing entire delivery-chain competitors in these highly ingrained markets is next to impossible.

The only kind of direct-to-home food delivery that will exist for the time being is the kind offered by the stores (because they make plenty of money on the goods they sell already, so they can offer delivery as a sort of perk), or a kind of luxury food delivery (in the vein of Blue Apron or, to a lesser degree, Instacart).

tl;dr: Blue Apron/Instacart, the "luxury" food delivery services, are the only non-chain delivery services that will survive. Stop&Shop Peapod et al. are subsidized and thus don't even need to worry about it.

Source: tried to start a food delivery startup, stopped when the math didn't add up

edit: I guess I should provide a more direct rebuttal. What I'm saying is, you've talked about the tech/PR side of this theoretical food delivery startup, but you've forgotten the food supply chain. That is actually a lot harder than the tech/PR side. It would require a highly substantial investment and fully custom logistics.
That's comforting.
It's an issue in an issue tracker. Nobody's blogging about it, or doing interviews in the media. I would consider this a reasonable level of drama for an issue tracker conversation. Again, I think Doug is probably pushing this in public (though not dramatically so, again it's an issue tracker which normally would have a couple dozen readers) as a final last ditch effort to get IBM to act right. Nothing wrong with taking things public if private conversations are going nowhere fast, as tends to happen with big corporate takeovers. I don't think he needs to worry about his messaging all that much; he's not a marketer, and doesn't seem to be trying to sell anything or get elected to anything. He's just explaining what's going on, and expressing his frustration with it.

Anyway, that's how I read it all. I agree that we are interpreting things differently, and I'm probably missing a lot of detail here. I scanned the thread and missed some details you've called out. But, I tend to take an optimistic approach to stuff like this. If someone has proven they're mostly a "head down get shit done" kinda person, I'm not gonna sweat it when they pop their head up and rant for a little while when things go pear-shaped. I'd probably rant, too, if something I was working on was being killed by a corporate overlord. Then I might decide to fork the thing.
Well, I suppose you could argue either way, but I think it's a better question in the sense that humans are going to be used as a control group by most people that follow pop science, and they're going to make assumptions that humans have this ability innately (I imagine development psychology has some degree of understanding for this already). Most discussion about this is going to be comparing the results to something else. Then there are questions like, could someone tell themselves apart from an identical twin without error?
Some people want to be correct at the expense of everything else.

I think it's some kind of psychological thing, because there's no real reason to be a doom-sayer. It's not like you get more respect or something.
In the video stallman states that nonfree software is in the control of the developer who owns it, which is true, but isnt a developer of free software equally in control of their software? I dont look into the source of every program on my OS, even though if i was to use 100% free software, I could. This means I am equally depending on the developer of the free software not to be malicious as I am the nonfree software.
We should have never moved away from our trusted 16bit systems.
Jada Pinkett debates boycotting Oscars over only white actors being nominated
Stallman just has a way of putting things that makes you feel doing otherwise is wrong. I never thought of data autonomy this way and I've been fine with using popular cloud services till now
There is also a second stream of just the telemetry without the hosted conversation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkz_lclGXNg
I only have a computer with Windows for two reasons currently - games, and for debugging frontend web code on an actual Windows machine (more uncommon - pretty much only has been for open source work).

Otherwise, I too have found Linux/OS X to be sufficient. However, for many of my friends, other reasons tie them to Windows, such as music DAWs.
If you're against involuntary death, shouldn't your top priority be curing aging? The vast majority of deaths on this planet are due to age-related illnesses. Not accidents, not violence, and certainly not environmental catastrophes.
> Yes, we're pushing the notification to a new tab (which can't be blocked or interfered with)

We went through a similar iteration with Password Alert. If you're setting focus on the new tab, an onBlur event could indicate that the current page has lost focus, perhaps due to the warning tab. I think notifying the user is still net-positive for the user's security.
> I have two kids, I have had two melanomas so far.

Ouch.

> I understand what it means when people say life is to short.

I'll bet, that's the kind of thing that will make this a background feeling almost continuously.

> But is life is too short to use your wealth and power to help solve the problem you acknowledge there is?

Well, PG is - in his own way - doing just that. He made quite a few people quite wealthy and he wasn't exactly obliged to do so. After all the first exit he had was one where he could have comfortably lived for the rest of his years without spending a single micro-second on the problems of others.

> That sounds like a weird idea.

It is, and I don't think that idea is actually present in this essay or any of the others. Horses for courses, PG is good at what he does and uses his wealth in the way he thinks best matches his skillset. Contrasted with say Zuckerbergs fairly hollow 'letter to my daughter' I frankly much prefer the PG variety, though of course I already had quite a different opinion about those two individuals before either of them wrote a line.

> Most of PGs essays aren't controversial they are more informative. Why is life too short for that?

He's not saying he won't write more essays. He's saying that he's going to be more in fire-and-forget mode, engaging the audience on his terms rather than feeling that he has to respond to each and every person out there with an axe to grind and an internet connection. I'd say more power to him.

So given that I won't go into the second part of your comment because I think you derailed somewhere right at the beginning making the rest not really relevant.
Hacker History Bookshelf, Revisited
Industrialist’s Dilemma – New Course at the Stanford Graduate School of Business
If done correctly I think this could have been great. Two full time employees working on the project is far more than it has seen in its lifetime. I don't there has ever been even a single full-time person working on it. Lots of amazing contributions of course though. Hopefully things work out, still feels a bit more dramatic than it should be.
OpenSUSE-SU-2016:0125-1: moderate: Security update for libebml, libmatroska
Forking a project as significant as Express isn't easy; you need help from many people to get it going. You make it sound as simple as clicking a button. (Linus may pull it off easily because he's Linus, but that proves nothing.)

This "soap opera" isn't of Doug's making. What he's saying seems very fair to me: he's willing to work on it if it's a community effort, and not under a corporate banner. Throughout the thread, he gives excellent reasons which justify his stand.

> The whole thing should've been on the IBM back channels until they got their shit together and could agree on some messaging

Earlier, you said this should have been solved in IBM's internal channels. Why? Doug doesn't work for IBM, and doesn't owe them anything. He's well within his rights to protest or complain openly, irrespective of how it affects IBM.

> don't hand the keys to anyone who isn't a trusted driver

Here's a link that explains what happened https://github.com/strongloop/express/issues/2264

> just be the best dev/leader you can be ...

Oh come on! We should be thankful for the effort so many talented people are putting in FOSS, often for no financial gain.
Works as advertised.
The battle for desktops and laptops is still not even close to won. Proprietary microcode in everything is on the rise, motherboard firmware is less open every generation of x86 hardware, and now we are seeing SSD microcontrollers be exploited and be otherwise untrustable.

Gains have been made, in that GPUs are much more open now than they were 10 years ago from AMD and Intel, and AMD has done a good job supporting their chipsets in coreboot for the last several generations of hardware, but it is still practically impossible to buy off the shelf parts and build a computer you actually control unless you accept AMD's microcode blobs for GPUs. And its not something to ham fist and say "don't worry about it" because there have been multiple instances of bugs in the microcode the GPU boots with having bugs in it that break the graphics stack on Linux. Freedom is valuable everywhere even if you don't practically see yourself taking advantage of it.
Personally, a combination of a dedicated meditation practice + mindfulness + a wee bit of studying Buddhist principles (I don't consider myself a "Buddhist"). I'm 36 and in the past 8+ months have made some pretty significant changes in the way I routinely think, and most importantly for me, created some space in between stimuli and reaction.

Anecdote: Thursday night I was going to the bathroom and dropped my phone in the toilet. Doneso - no amount of rice was saving that thing. Replacement can't get here til Monday. After that understandably frustrating experience my girlfriend made a point to call out that I pretty much didn't flinch over it all. Kinda laughed it off. For context, the learned behaviors I've owned since childhood typically goad me into punching a wall over such incidents.

It's a bit difficult to explain, but putting actual practices into play to alter the way you think/react/act feels to me like "unburdening" yourself. There was a great line in the book 10% Happier (great, easy read, no self-improvement BS) about the author wanting to call it "The Voice In My Head Is An Asshole" that kind of gets to the heart of it all, for me. We don't control ourselves! That's not how every day living is set up. If we could, then we'd never be sad or angry or stressed. It would be that simple; just tell yourself to be happy and you'd be happy. Such a simple concept but not something easily internalized.
I think the attackers didn't take anything until 6 months after providing the malicious wallet code. Apparently they were making use of the exploit during that time, probably gathering information on how to get to the important "cold" wallets.

It may have taken them the whole 6 months to figure out how to do that, because I can't imagine them waiting once they had the info they needed; the risk of someone else stealing it first would have been very high. Cryptsy's always been sloppy. They had obvious race conditions in their trade execution, and people regularly complained about stuff like seeing their market orders matching against offers in the middle of the order book instead of the best price. It also used to be easy to end up with a negative balance in one currency (these are unleveraged spot trades mind you, we're not talking options or something). I really have no idea how they made it this long.
Yet conversely, your point is an example of the very 'balance routine' mentioned in the article.

Let's say that Trump is an egregiously bad candidate. (Please note I'm trying to make a logical point, not give informed comment on US politics). Offering up the worst candidate from the other side as an equivalent might well appear to reduce bias, and yet be wrong in an objective sense.

Not that I'm trying to claim there's much objectivity to be found in party politics, but it seems reasonable to treat egregious-badness that way. Also, I have no doubt one could delve back through the years to find truly woefully dreadful Democratic presidential hopefuls, but since hopefully they are history's also-rans it's starting to ask a lot of knowledge from the audience. Just as with the debate of whether it's a good idea to fill one's lungs with toxic smoke, balance doesn't always help.
What struck me when I read that quote (as a Vonnegut loving computer nerd) was that computers at their best free up time to "dance"! That's the promise of a future where computers do most of our work for us: that we'll have tons of time to do whatever we enjoy doing. But instead, we're mostly scared of it, because we aren't sure what we'll do to make money if that happens, because we need money to buy ourselves the time to "dance". It's a real conundrum.
Had anyone tried Mingle?
https://www.thoughtworks.com/mingle/

I use it and it's quite good. Not free though.
Sorry, turning the "Use OpenGL for all rendering" setting off made no difference.

I honestly wouldn't know where to start with filing useful bug reports. I'm a software developer myself, so I appreciate the need for useful information and ideally reproducible test cases, but at the moment we're seeing graphical glitches in everything from menu displays to dialogs to the tabs for different sheets, far too many different areas to isolate and investigate each one. It seems more likely that some combination of hardware/software isn't playing nicely on the test system, since presumably if everyone were seeing what we are the LO team would be seeing plenty of feedback already. If you'd like to investigate or try to triage it somehow, I can ask someone to get in touch by mail, and maybe that would lead to something specific enough to be worth putting in a bug report for more detailed investigation?
Unlikely. The only place for thermal energy to escape is into deep space, in the form of infrared radiation. Given that the dimming has been large and recent, it would have to have been a recent collision - which would take millions of years to cool.
This article assumes the purpose of life is accomplishment. Don't forget to stop and smell the roses.
Remembering bobby fischer
The problem is that the moment you think that code review will stop an adversary (and you should treat all the coin developers as adversaries as a matter of course here), odds are good you've lost, no matter what the language is.

You should still review, but couple that with sandboxing the code in VMs (and as much as I love Docker etc.: that's insufficient), and make sure that you fully firewall that VM and the entire machine the VM is on off from everything else in your system. And crucially, that means ensuring that outbound access is also firewalled and filtered.

In this case, the coins use of IRC (for discovery or something?) ought to have been a red flag and made them ask for a precise spec of what IRC traffic should be expected and ensure they were proxying and filtering and logging all the IRC traffic. This wouldn't stop the creator from embedding more convoluted command channels in something that looks like the normal message exchange with peers, but this was just way too easy.

There'd still be plenty of scope for malicious code. E.g. the daemon could still have stolen all LuckyCoins deposited, for example, without requiring any suspicious communication, but at least with proper sandboxing and firewalling it'd be (if done right) isolated to that specific coin.
Well, it certainly made my Chrome on OS X unresponsive too.
Also did a number on Safari on my Mac (though recoverable of course.)
It's free. They have run it a couple years in a row now starting in January.
The Unreasonable Reputation of Neural Networks
Once the money is free of the bank, it's out there in the wild, even if the borrower defaults. If it's deposited into a different bank, it could be fractionally lended and the money supply would increase. So at the worst, a loan default is money supply neutral.
The C++ weakness
You can "build equity" by doing things like buying, well, equities. Or fixed income, or any of a variety of other investment vehicles.

The only thing special about real estate investment is the massive government subsidies for it. (E.g., owner-equivalent rents are untaxed, mortgage interest is tax deductible, etc.) The best solution to that problem is simply to eliminate those tax subsidies.
Live coverage: Falcon 9 counting down to launch from California at 18:42 GMT
Can you not direct link this please, put it in a text post
Possibly! We'd both have to spell out a lot of details to have that argument. I'm not the one to have it either, because I don't know how plausible it is that we can really solve aging anytime soon.

But I'd say it's not super-relevant to the argument at hand, since the person who we're discussing doesn't say "these environmental problems are less important than aging" but just denies the specific harms are happening on the scale they are.

Edit: crap, left out a not. "It's not super-relevant."
Works on Chrome too. Not that either one is particularly hard to crash. Too many animated gifs on one page will do it. I rue the day I bought this iPad is what I'm saying.
Apache Phoenix: HPerf RDB layer over HBase for low latency applications
locks up chrome on windows as well
My example above is Linux, and Azure is cheaper for that one specific example.

Just making the point that it's not easy to compare. You mention one reason above. It's not as simple as "Azure charges for both ingress/egress." For example, Azure includes 5TB/month ingress/egress. AWS 1TB/egress, unlimited ingress. I imagine in some cases that 5TB in/out is better than 1TB/unlimited.

There are many others, like the fact that the instances don't have many 1:1 matchups across providers. Add in things like load balancing, storage, etc, and it gets more complex.

It does appear that Azure is usually more expensive, but it's not so easy to tell for sure.
http://phoenix.apache.org/language/index.html
The only one I know of is Zenpayroll