skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe the whole point of pretraining on reference policies, which a collection of "optimally" played human games is, is just avoidance of bad local optimum.

It can be a case that training and learning on just a learned policy is going to get you stuck in a local optimum that is of worse quality than the one with pretraining.

If they stored all of the AI played games their reference policy (the data) would be of extreme value. You could train a recurrent neural network, without any reinforcement learning, that you could probably run on a smartphone and beat all of the players. You wouldn't need a monte carlo search too.

There are algorithms [1] that have mathematical guarantees of achieving local optimality from reference policies that might not be optimal, and can even work better than the reference policy (experimentally) - assuming that the reference policy isn't optimal. The RNN trained with LOLS would make jointly local decisions over the whole game and each decision would guarantee that a minimization of future regret is being done. Local optimality mentioned here isn't finding a locally optimal model that approximates the strong reference policy, it means that it will find the locally optimal decisions (which piece to put where) without the need for search.

The problem is that for these algorithms you have to have a closely good reference policy, and given a small amount of human played Go games, reinforcement learning was the main algorithm instead, it allowed them to construct a huge number of meaningful games, from which their system learned, which allowed them to construct a huge number of more meaningful games, etc.

But, now when they have games that have a pretty good (AlphaGo is definitely playing on a superhuman level) reference policy, they can train the model based on that reference policy and they wouldn't need a search part of the algorithm at all.

The model would try to approximate the reference policy and would definitely be worse than AlphaGo real-search based policy, but it wouldn't be significantly worse (mathematical guarantee). The model is trained starting from a good player, and it tries to approximate the good player, on the other hand, reinforcement learning starts from an idiot player, and tries to become a good player, reinforcement learning is thus much much harder.

[1]: http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~hal/docs/daume15lols.pdf
So it is indeed related to Estonia.

Regarding the geographic location, it's probably a Choopa/vultr machine.

Seems like a digitalocean clone though with more geographical locations and they support arbitrary OS images.
You seem to be conflating "numerical computing" with machine learning. However, numerical computing typically involves solving PDEs via e.g. finite elements or finite differences, or solving large systems of linear equations associated with such methods.

The difference between the two is that when solving PDEs, accuracy is paramount, so even using single precision is a bit of a compromise, whereas in machine learning, the trend seems to be to use half-precision or lower, sacrificing accuracy for speed.

For classical numerical computing, e.g. solving PDEs or linear equations, Java may not be the best choice, e.g. see the following paper:

How Java's Floating Point Hurts Everyone Everywhere:

https://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~wkahan/JAVAhurt.pdf
He knows it beat the european champion 5-0, and that it outperforms all commercial and free Go games.
It is the KISS principle.
I think you're missing the point that Bitcoin is an interesting payment network, despite the fact that as a consumer currency it's not particularly useful. Regardless of whether you or anyone wants an anonymous digital currency, or whether Bitcoin succeeds as being the dominant blockchain network in the long run, there's no denying that it's an interesting and useful technology. I see many commenters on HN who don't seem to understand the difference between these.
Longtime VC Michael Goguen hit with explosive lawsuit
The article is missing something -- a mathematically accurate description. Not you.
I have no idea what this means, but can't imagine how it could be significant as a theorem, assuming the correct statement is reasonably similar.
The theorem as stated in the article is definitely wrong. Equal length would make it correct, I think.
I think because UBI is guaranteed to be fair. With negative income tax you're still going to get people fiddling with their taxes to get every penny they can out of the system. UBI is also less bureaucratic so less expensive. You simply wire everyone who has registered their money. With negative income tax their is more paperwork which means more people need to be employed to deal with it and to deal with the potential fraud. It also places more burden on citizens to correctly report taxes or face prosecution.
Many efforts have been started to have a middle ground, for example key escrow. However, key escrow might not be that different from allowing almost anyone to pwn your communications and data... that was a huge argument in the mid-1990s.
They wouldn't ever do anything that forward facing to the public. What they do is pass laws to put pressure on makers of apps like whatsapp to build them their own personal back door.
I have been using gtk-record-desktop for many years. You can install it on Ubuntu simply with a "sudo apt-get install gtk-recordmydesktop".
I seriously can't tell if this article being here is an advertisement. Is it possible the site owners have been paid to have this post here?
Some simple principles. The first to bear in mind is estoppel. If Microsoft releases a version of Linux, this indicates that they have accepted the GPL2. They cannot go back and argue that it is further encumbered by patents that they control. This would have prevented the release!

This applies to Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, and many other companies.
Hey, I appreciate your vigilance, thanks
FWIW Deep Blue was also a Supercomputer at the time it beat Kasparov. The phone in your pocket can now beat a Grandmaster.
"Basic Income" is wrong idea imo. I'd rather see something like a "Public Dividend" that would redistribute corporate income tax revenue.
> Skeptics have said that achieving this milestone would not happen within this decade, our lifetimes or even ever.

Did any credible skeptics actually claim this would never happen? If so, I'd love to hear their reasoning.
Working around “QImode can alias everything” missed optimizations
And wouldn't two of equal length do? I think we are missing an explanation of the theorem.

edit: oh hang on, I see now: Trump Foundation

It's one of those theorems.

edit: yes three mean they can't be longer than the radius. Isn't it interesting. You need 3 for a circle.

What about other shapes?
Would be nice if this information was more visible.

I was quite surprised that the link leads to some random G+ page about "smartplug" hacking while people here are talking as if it was a commercial product.
Does that ansible thing support incremental deploys? Such that installing 'jo' here will idempotently install it on other machines?
Our 36 Hours on Show HN
Well remember Euclid's geometry is fundamentally flawed. The parallel postulate, that fact that parallel lines never meet, can be be used to really mess with a grade 7-12 math teacher's head if you invest the time to teach a couple of tricks to your kid.

The simplest example is to show that an obtuse angle and a right angle are the same through a construction. The placement of points is crucial to make that work.
Enough people is skeptical about AI to make it a problem.

Now, being more specific about Go:

- Lee Sedol himself was confident he would win.

- Ke Jie said he would win against AlphaGo. I think he would lose too.
How is this different than psutil?
Not sure who invented or cloned what.

Are you saying that Microsoft invented POSIX?
In end-to-end encryption the private keys are on the user's phone. The point of a wiretap is not to let the target know you're listening. Having the code source + user's public keys from WhatsApp is of no help in decrypting.
HTTP/2 and SPDY indicator extension for Chrome
If he didn't before game one he definitely did afterwards. I have a hard time believing it would be easy or that he didn't try as hard as he could.
> And so far the XPS 13 seems way more attractive than the new Lenovo Skylake laptops (e.g. the 460s), which have lower resolution displays (some models still start with a 1.366 x 768 (!) display,

Laptop shopping is so frustrating because almost all of the manufacturers are clearly segmenting the market into two groups: shit and non-shit. In the shit group, you get painfully slow HDDs and painfully low res displays that would feel right at home on a laptop from a decade ago. In the non-shit group, you get SSDs, good displays, and prices that are two to three times higher even though the actual cost of the components hasn't gone up by nearly that much.

It's infuriating, not so much for myself (I end up wanting the high-end anyway), but when trying to give recommendations to friends and family on more limited budgets, because the entire lower end of the market is unnecessarily terrible. I just end up recommending Chromebooks because, hey, at least a lot of them have SSDs, and they're cheap. The screens typically suck, but when you're paying so little it doesn't feel like getting ripped off. Buying a mainstream $600 laptop feels like getting ripped off.
That would be about right considering Ke Jie is 8-2 vs Lee Sedol and assuming Lee wins one. That assumes that we are seeing AlphaGo's strongest game and not its "just past the current opponent" game. If Lee doesn't win any then it is very difficult to estimate AlphaGo's strength from the games. If Lee wins one game then a 50-50 AlphaGo vs Ke Jie would be expected.
With only two lines of equal distance. the point may not be in the center.
> You can only hold a mint block until right before another block arrives. Once another block is known your mint block is garbage.

What controls this?
That's pretty much how I see it. It's something that simply must happen, there's not a lot of choice about it. Better to figure it out now than be forced into it later.
I understand very little of Go beyond its basic rules and having played only a couple of matches with a friend who knows as little as I do...

I reviewed the match, and it seems that very quickly White (AlphaGo) went aggressive, and Black was trying to contain it. I suppose a human player can commit serious mistakes by playing too aggressively from the start, right? But the summary of the game speculates move 31 might have been the losing move (maybe implying the game until that moment wasn't going so bad for Lee Sedol?), while to my untrained eyes it looks as if White was constantly on the offensive from the start, and Black was playing almost exclusively to contain it.

Or am I reading this wrong?
Imagine a point inside a circle, close to the edge, and draw two lines to different points to the edge. That point isn't necessarily the center.

Unless you add a third line of equal distance that needs to go to yet another point on the edge. The only way to make that work is if the point is in the center (and the lines automatically are radii).
You have to trust the government to have a middle ground. It has been shown again and again that we cannot trust them.

Even if we trust one government, it doesn't mean you can trust the next one.

If the USG force the US tech companies to provide a backdoor, then the technology is out there in order for non-US tech companies to pick up where they have left off.

It is a battle the USG cannot and should not win.

Trust the maths. Thank you Snowden for showing us the light.
It follows from the statement that if two circles intersect in more than two points, they're identical. Which seems like a familiar theorem, that I can't seem to place. So it's more like a corollary. It would be remarkable if this hadn't come up before, but I want to believe because of how good a story it makes...
Nope, you can have two equal lines extending from a non-central point. Connecting the points would give you an isosceles triangle.
Not sure about the specific situation to parent is referring to but there is a difference. Take the UK referendum to leave the EU. There are valid points on both sides but when MP's start saying that leaving/staying makes it more likely we'll be attacked by terrorists I would consider that a fear campaign. It's a completely hypothetical point and only spoken to scare people into agreeing with you.
The XPS arrow keys don't look any different from the ones on a Macbook Pro, and those are fine.

I end up using the touchpad for many of the things I used to use the arrow keys for anyway.
> Terrible, terrible idea. This is how people are discriminated against. Prevent enough people that don't agree with your politics from getting a job, they can no longer vote, and you can screw them.

Sadly, you can already do this in the most US states today by wink-nudging the criminal justice system into disproportionately locking up members of groups you'd rather not see voting.
I meant that it acts as if it were a credit card from the payment processing point of view.

I address the same problem by having multiple bank accounts that have small balances and auto-depositing my monthly budget for different things into them. If any one gets compromised (and the bank is unwilling to fix it), it doesn't take out my whole bank account. Plus it provides a nice "money into envelopes" style of budgeting that's very easy to understand.

If your card only works at the ATM, then how do you buy expensive things (something that costs more than the daily ATM withdrawal limit)?
I agree that a lot of forms of employment will eventually be automated.

I'm more optimistic, however. I think labor will just evolve, just as it's done with every corresponding evolution in technology.
Mystery Deepens Over Death of Former Putin Ally Mikhail Lesin
The years of having "too many pixels" are thankfully well behind us (by several years). All modern OSes handle lots of pixels great, so having more pixels is always better, except maybe as far as battery life is concerned.
I just look for models known to work well with OpenWRT. This way I don't have to deal with random bugs or limitations of stock firmwares.
Kudos to the teacher who helped her develop her idea instead of scolding her for using ideas that weren't being taught in his classroom.
Thanks, we're hoping to do something in the same lines. However, it's more tricky when it's a chat, as the answer isn't as easy to present to the whole community and gain more karma from.

Any thoughts on that?
Imagine a condition where the local optima and global optima are not aligned.
Though it's true many people were skeptical about an AI winning at Go played at this level, I think people are mostly skeptical about general AI, not about algorithms that win at playing board games. It's different to be skeptical about specialized AI than about general AI.
A basic income that isn't universal isn't basic income. The entire point is that everyone in society receives the same minimal amount, regardless of what other income they might receive. The reduces bureaucratic complexity and problems like the welfare trap.
I loved the brief summary at the top.

In contrast, many times there are "long form" articles which expect me to invest 10 minutes reading them before I even have a good idea what they're about. You know what I mean: Someone grew up privileged, or in the 'hood. Then had a plethora of tangential life experiences. Then maybe an epiphany. Then we begin to read something about the purported topic.
for example, someone could take your SSN and then go apply for loans at the bank under your name
In game 3, when Lee Sedol played on the left side, a capture race started.
AlphaGo made his dragon look vulnerable to be captured. Lee Sedol attacked it, and AlphaGo defended it enough so it would not die, but making a huge territory on the bottom part of the board.
When AlphaGo's dragon lived, Lee Sedol realized AlphaGo was ahead in score, and needed to invade the largest AlphaGo's territory in the bottom. This invasion was not feasible, and Lee Sedol was relying on a long shot strategy involving kos. This idea was finally refuted by AlphaGo, leaving him with no feasible ko threats, forcing Lee Sedol to resign.
> Equal length would make it correct, I think.

And the three lines of equal length should go to different points on the edge of the circle as well. Three lines from a point to the same position on the edge wouldn't work - but perhaps I'm mathematically paranoid now :-)
The primary target of WebAssembly is strongly-typed pre-compiled languages, where the kinds of features you want would just lead to slowdowns and excessive memory consumption. There is no hardware currently out there that is a tagged architecture, so expecting them to bend backwards is not a realistic option.
Isn't this common knowledge? Ask any drafter ever and they'll tell you it is.

It seems pretty generous to say she "discovered a new theorem."
Kosovo’s Gjirafa search engine scores $2M as Google fails Albanian speakers
That was my thought too. Here's my proof: Let P be the point, r the length of the lines, and A,B,C the other endpoints of the lines.

A, B, and C all lie on the circle of radius r centered at P. The question is if they can simultaneously lie on some other circle. In other words, the question can be restated as whether two distinct circles can intersect at three or more points.

One way to see that this is impossible is to consider the equation of a circle. There are three parameters (for instance, x and y coordinate of the center along with the radius). Hence, by specifying three points on the circle, one creates a system of three equations with three unknowns, which has a unique solution.

For the generalization to dimension d (where in the original example d = 2), then I think this shows that d+1 equal-length lines from a point to a hypersphere imply that the point is the center.
I suspect the fees+interest thing is mostly a cover story. As unflattering as it seems, I'd be unsurprised to learn that the three pages of fine print are a calculated display, to make it seem as though they're merely not-entirely-oriented-to-the-public-good but otherwise aboveboard private corporations. And it's not as if they don't get some income from putting the screws to those short on cash, but if that were the extent of it then I should never get a credit card offer, ever. My only credit history is on-time rent payments, and my employment history + no dependents + no college loans should make it obvious that I would never generate any income from late-payment fees or interest. And yet, I've received offers throughout my adult life.

But even if they never saw a penny of income directly from me, what they would still get out of it would be the data. And insight into the purchase habits of consumers with plenty of expendable income - the same people that would otherwise be a losing proposition for a business that actually relied on failure to pay on time to stay afloat - seems like it'd be far more valuable than the entirety of what they'd be able to squeeze out of the already-cash-strapped.

I'm actually highly impressed at the extent to which they're completely successful in focusing the public discussion on their "outrageous" and exploitative policies. They put on a thoroughly convincing show of fighting tooth-and-nail against regulations to reign in that behavior. But I think it's because, if it ever got seriously done, people would start asking how it was they were still in business - and they would definitely still be in business. But the finance operation is just how they collect the raw material for their actual product.
Somewhere in this direction is where I've been wanting to see the iOS and Mac App Stores go. There needs to be a method to incentivize app quality beyond the current method of a set of rules & guidelines for devs to follow, and a bunch of one-off user reviews.

Despite iOS being huge, the universe of good apps (and by extension good devs) is quite limited and tractable by human curators, especially broken down by category. No algorithm can effectively compile the variety of criteria that make up a good app (tho they can inform that compilation process). If I were ran the iOS/Mac App Stores, I'd incorporate select curators as a sort of second party relationship - independent from Apple, but chosen for their credentials in a category/area of expertise and their ability to write for a broad audience within that category. I'd give them first class treatment in the app store, with embedded commentary on why the app matters and for whom.

I think Apple employee curators have their hands tied in not being able to provide real commentary or expert opinion, and thus are not able to pick winners in any sort of explicitly reasoned way (which doesn't really incentivize increased quality, just relationship building with Apple employees). The key bit is curating the curators to ensure their independence from financial incentive and their focus on broader appeal in a given domain, like finding the Mossbergs of different categories. The super niche curators will still have blogs and social media.

Of course the path beyond second party is the Steam example, where reviewers can sort of graduate to a superuser reviewer path. I think Apple has been reticent on this front given that the App Store hasn't been a priority, and that they've had trouble with social with Ping and now even artists on Apple Music.

One of the things I did at my education journalism company was build a near complete database of education apps [1] to help educators make sense of a large universe of possibilities. My experience is that if you're the one with the database + reviews, the best you can do is organize intelligently (according to user needs) and collect relevant data, but that because impartiality matters, your hands are tied when it comes to picking winners. This creates a mis-match with the user's desires, who want to find something quickly and be assured with decent, independent analysis. A solution to this I believe is second party curators.

[1] https://www.edsurge.com/products
It's a fun fantasy, I admit.
This is what could happen with only two lines. An approximate drawing, but you get the idea.[0]

[0]: http://imgur.com/gDjm3AS
It just doesn't have as big of an impact though. Each team has a very limited set of plays it's actually able to call and execute. Maybe 300 max (as a guess). Many times much less than that. So there's really not much room for an AI to see huge improvements via play calling.

It's really all about execution on the field and the "feel" of the game.
> the male consistently tried to feed his female with foods that differed from what he had recently seen her eating.

Calling this mind-reading is blatant click-bait. He watched them feed her.
For all the people dealing with shitty dell customer support on the phone, try using their @dellcares twitter account. Had a broken acreen glass and later a faulty fan on my 2014 xps 13, and they sent around a technician each time, all via twitter. Much less painfull than hanging on the phone. Excellent customer support.
Apart from it being disturbing, as a non-American I am finding it hilarious that this infrastructure you have built to spy on me is only concerning to you when it is turned on yourselves.

With all this talk of "Americans being spied on" all I can say, as a non-American, is welcome to the club.
How common is that?
> If a majority of a society wants only to barely survive, rather than improve themselves and/or humanity, that is a problem itself.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that advances in technology have made it such that there is a 1% of individuals who progress so fast that they make the rest look like they're at a standstill by comparison, regardless of how hard they try.
He had "effektivt" (or similar) instead of "effectively" initially.