skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is really neat! But I think it's a stretch to call it AI-generated jazz music.

As I understand it, the author has trained an LSTM on a single MIDI file -- "And Then I Knew" by Pat Metheny. The network is then asked to generate MIDI notes in sequence.

What this network has been asked to do is to produce an output stream that is statistically similar to the single MIDI input file it has been trained on. It would be more accurate to call this an "And Then I Knew" generator. Its "cost function" -- the function the network is trying to minimize during training -- is exactly how well it reproduced the target song.

Neural networks are "universal function approximators". It's not surprising that given a single input, a network can produce outputs that are statistically similar to it.

A network that could compose novel MIDI jazz would look like this:

* Train a network on a corpus of thousands to hundreds of thousands of MIDI jazz files.

* Add significant regularization and model capacity limits to prevent the network from "memorizing" its inputs.

* Generate music somehow -- the char-RNN approach described here is fine. There are other methods.

You want the network to build representations that capture the patterns of jazz music necessary to pastiche them but not high-level enough representations that the network is exactly humming the tune "And Then I Knew". This is so much of a problem that any paper presenting a novel result in generative modeling pretty much must include a section presenting evidence their model is not memorizing its inputs.

I can hum a few classic jazz tunes from memory but that mental process is not jazz music composition -- it's reproducing something from memory. If we're going to call a model "AI-generated jazz" you need some way to tell the network to not hum a tune it knows and instead compose a new tune with the principles/patterns it knows. Since we can't speak to our models and tell them to think one way and not the other, part of the trick in this field is to come up with models that can only do one thing and not the other.
A screen resolution is less unique than the size of a maximized window.
Teradata launching new global IoT analytics group
>Marketing is about raising interest.

That's one component, but marketing is bigger than that. In fact, this is seems to be a major point of confusion, that "marketing" is advertising.

Marketing encompasses bringing a product to market, perhaps even creating that market. According to Wikipedia's definition:

"This way marketing satisfies these needs and wants through the development of exchange processes and the building of long-term relationships."
Unfortunately, it's not open-sourced (yet?): https://github.com/tailordev
Perceptions of 460 JavaScript developers about AngularJS
> I understand that, but it means that debian inevitably distributes buggy software in a supposedly 'stable' distribution.

Bugs are a matter of perspective. If alleged bugfixes actually make you modify your currently working setup, then I don't consider that much of an actual bugfix, just something that makes me do work for no real benefit:

http://stevelosh.com/blog/2012/04/volatile-software/

I like Debian stable. Two years is an entirely reasonable amount of time to be able to have most software in my OS immutable except for security fixes. For the tiny amount of software for which I may want the bleeding edge, there are language-specific "package" "managers" (lol npm) or I can just backport the software myself.
It's based on the Lobsters codebase, and my fork is available on GitHub.

* https://lobste.rs
* https://github.com/jcs/lobsters
* https://github.com/pushcx/barnacl.es
I've seen the same.

How has HN (partly) avoided this? I guess having a separate "show" category helps.

I think the high-brow tone helps too. Sometimes it chafes but it's way better than the alternative. People do self-promote here but to get away with it you have to have some actual substance... any "hey look at me I am awesome" stuff tends to get buried.
Yes but the swinging hours pattern will melt since cars are now decoupled from humans cycle. Freeing a lot of pseudo-space.
Coming from an avid Jazz listener, this is awful. Not even close.

I don't mean this as a slight at all, but definitely raise the bar on your experiments.
Excellent question! (can you tell I'm bored in a hospital)?

Well, it all started when I was about three, and I discovered ants. Fire ants, to be specific. Biting me all over cause I'd chosen to hide right on top of their nest. There's a lesson there.
I agree. It seems so forced!
I realized I wrote a wall of text in response. I'm not picking on you, but I think you brought up a point that I think is really worth responding to in depth, because I felt that way in one point in time, and I've slowly realized how wrong I was.

I used to believe that I would surely notice if I was in an environment that fostered harassment. Over time, I've realized that harassment is a problem, but I was just looking for the wrong things. Harassment doesn't really manifest itself in a way that can be made clear from a single objective measurement.

There is a lot of research about sexism that really reveals what is not obvious to me, as a man, about how sexism affects women:

When talking on the phone in a customer support role, women are more likely to be yelled at.

Men tend to talk for a disproportionately large amount of a conversation.

Assertive women are viewed much more negatively than assertive men by both men and women.

Studies like these made me re-evaluate how harassment presents itself. I used to think that it was obvious, like wolf-whistles on the street. Harassment is more like living in a world where everyone is just a little (or a lot) bit shittier to you. It's a lot easier to ignore, because you've had the same experiences.

As an example, I currently am one of three guys out of 25 people at my current company. We are a non-profit, and we have about 800k constituents, 100k of whom give in any given year. We all field a lot of calls from constituents who aren't happy for whatever reason. In the two years I've worked here, I've been yelled at once. However, the women who work here get yelled at weekly, regardless of their position.

I majored in biology, and took a ton of CS in school. Bio was mostly women, and the CS program had barely a handful. As I look back, I've realized that the women in the programs really needed to present a lot more evidence for any other their proposals than men ever did.

In both cases, it's really easy to dismiss criticisms with the platitude "Those things happen to everyone." They do, but they happen more to women. These little things add up, and teach women that their point of view is easily discounted, even when the evidence is incontrovertible. Reporting sexual harassment, even to someone you trust, is a huge gamble. All of their life experience points to the fact that they won't be taken seriously, especially if the person they are reporting it to is a male. They are way more likely to be seen as not being a team-player for reporting it, even if they are 100% in the right.

Long story short: in order to see harassment, it's incredibly important to listen to what women are saying. It's also really important to listen to what you are saying in response, and whether you are actually listening.
endl is not broken, and does not need fixing. it's one of several ways to do things and this video is pointing out that its documented features may not be exactly what you want, and alternatives are available.

However, sometimes endl is indeed what you want. There is nothing to "fix" here, except maybe your attitude.
After Vote to Remove Brazil’s President, Key Figure Holds Meetings in Washington
The planet's not going to die from an increase in CO2. We might, but the planet will be fine.
Did Obama administration offer New Balance a bribe to support TPP?
Yeah, that's a pretty inappropriate reaction!
It will be open source this week. I am currently working on it, so stay tuned :)
> I just don't understand that constant demand by both society and internally to have experiences at all costs. We think that without experiences our minds will become dull and uninteresting, experiences would wake us up from our dull lives.

I don't think we're expecting to wake up.

I think many of us feel totally powerless to live the lives we want to live: to get the job we want, to buy our parents a house, to be seen by our peers the way we'd like to be seen. We know we're up against a wall and that to some degree we're settling for uninteresting things.

But then someone says "the Sistine Chapel has the most beautiful frescos in the world" and what we hear is "if you can just get your butt here, you can experience a taste of the best stuff there is". It's a chance to stop thinking about what we can't have and just think about what we are having and how great it is.

In some sense, actually experiencing the place isn't really important. In fact, it's pretty dangerous. If you paid attention you might realize that you actually don't know anything about antiquities, and you don't actually care about Michelangelo. Looking deeply at the attraction can only cheapen it.

But if you just stand there, in the spot experts say to stand, and you pay your money, and the staff do the thing they do when they get the money, then for a few minutes you can really believe that you have it good.

It's self-actualization as a service.
If you can do it for less, go ahead. The fact that multiple companies all have similar margins, and even open access (besides for the privately funded/subsidized ones) has the same order of magnitude charges makes me think it's unlikely.
"gateway drug to semi-conductor physics and electronics." => So true. But I will wait a little bit more than 9 years before teaching semi-conductor physics to my little boy ;-)
tinysshd does not have the 90's crypto by default. It is optional. Nor does it have the "extreme complexity".
Yes, rando astrophysicists on twitter:

https://twitter.com/astrokatie/status/532509765989965824
Sounds like an awesome way to spend your life, enjoy!
They are the two advances people are excited by. Putting both in the first sentence is a way to lure people in to read the article.
The key document given in this article is the Robinson report of 1968. Looking at the excerpts given, this report made a prediction for CO2 level rise that can be tested: it predicted about 400 ppm by the year 2000 (from a value of about 320 in 1968). This was an overestimate: the actual level in 2000 (using the Mauna Loa measurements, which seem to be the key reference relied on in the report) was about 375.

This enables us to test a second prediction made by the report: the temperature increase caused by C02 level rise. The report gives a very wide range for this: 1.1 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit, depending on the humidity change. The usual baseline assumption about humidity is that relative humidity will remain constant, and the report notes that that assumption leads to the larger prediction--7 degrees F--for temperature rise by the year 2000. That is about 4 degrees Celsius.

Even if we correct for the actual CO2 level rise vs. predicted--about a 20% increase vs. 25% predicted--that still gives about a 3 degree Celsius predicted temperature rise by the year 2000, as compared to 1968. The actual rise was about 0.5 degrees Celsius.

The report does say that the estimating method it uses likely overestimates temperature rise; but it does not, as far as I can see, consider the possibility that it might overestimate temperature rise by so much. So as far as I can see, the oil industry's decision to treat this information as much more uncertain than its authors claimed was reasonable.
Hacking Team's 'Illegal' Latin American Empire
Implementing the Entropy language by abusing decorators
One of so many. Seems like they've ran out of other people's money indeed.
Potentially, higher acceleration/deceleration would allow a computer to use simpler collision prevention algorithms. Also, there is no shifter there.
Curious as to how you see as the value proposition for the site's users.
Keeping Research Surveys Short – But Not TOO Short
Using a straight-up "no" can turn it into an outright confrontation, which can be pretty dangerous if the guy isn't the type that will take "no" for an answer.

Once I gave a guy a simple-but-polite "no" in college, and he responded with harassing emails/repeated phone calls/stalking/etc for months.

Once during an internship, a superior cornered me in my office after-hours, blocking my exit and declaring his love for me. I could've said "no", but I was alone and cornered and in a very vulnerable situation, so I stammered over excuses about being really busy with work right then and thanked God that my internship was ending in a few days.

I wish I could just say "no", because most men would be civil and bow out and appreciate the straightforwardness. But I have no way to know in advance which kind of person any given guy is going to be.
Using petrochemicals has already devastated the global economy. We will spend trillions to attempt to fix the damage that has already been caused, when exactly $0 is what we should have to spend. We are causing a mass extinction event on the planet and will never be able to undo all the physical damage done. We will spend a huge amount of the world's money, resources and time to do our best to fix it, and all that is wasted because it could have been used to move forward sustainably rather than make a few people obscenely rich at the expense of most life on Earth.
MS Office 2016 Crack and Product Key [Professional] Free Download
Again, over again, yet again, one more time, once again, this time just for you, I clearly, clearly, clearly, more than once,
clearly, very clearly, fully unambiguously, said, fully clearly, right there,

"... honey, and I say this out of 100% affection, caring, and respect"

And I said "honey" with "100% affection, caring, and respect".

100%. Clearly.

> Please tell me this post is performance art and not the way you actually talk to women in your real life.

I wrote this post here in this blog for just the right reason, to be helpful and in response to the OP. The OP was all about personal, feminine, intimate things, and "constant nightmares", and I responded in a corresponding way. That is, the women were having "nightmares" and, as men, we are supposed to be and should be concerned, to be protective, to have sympathy and empathy. And I do, and did, and so posted here.

My response was fully appropriate for and corresponding to the content of the OP -- fully.

Or, again, once again, over again, the OP was about some intimacy and correspondingly so was my response.

For "in your real life", the OP was not much like what women would talk about in real life around an office, which is the professional context of the OP, and neither is my caring, sympathetic "honey". For my post here, there is nothing, nothing, Nothing, NOTHING wrong with "honey" -- instead, "honey" is fully appropriate, affectionate, what one would say to a daughter, sister, niece, or any girl or women having "constant nightmares".

Your response is not against the content I included. You said nothing about my content. That content is not easy to discover, and I posted it to help those OP women with "constant nightmares". My content should help them a lot. I know some things about anxiety in women -- what I posted should help, a lot. E.g., as I posted, I've been a prof and seen a lot in academics, and also in business, IBM, GE, FedEx, and more, and only a tiny fraction of readers here at HN have the advantages of that background to post in response to the OP here. What I posted should be seen as darned helpful. But, you are attacking me, me, personally, not the content of my post, and based on your assumption of something about my behavior in real life and not in my post.

You are extrapolating for no good reason. You owe me an apology and a retraction of your attack.
For what it's worth, it used to be pretty standard to put the ToC at the back of the book when making epub and mobi files.

We did it at Leanpub, and I'm pretty sure we were just following what the Prags and (if I remember correctly) O'Reilly were doing.

The reason was that opening an epub and flipping through a long ToC before you get to the book is really annoying. There is a way to set the "starting page" in epubs, but many ebook readers ignored this at the time and just opened at the title-page, so putting the ToC at the end was just a better reader experience.

Now that most e-readers use the start-page setting properly, ToCs are mostly at the beginning of ebooks.
You do what has always been done in the past -- you change the law once it proves untenable. Happens all the time actually.
Okay, but why the downvote?
Combining the two, would still have done this:

"We didn't make an effort to carpool because it wasn't convenient."

if the oil companies had not done this:

"deliberately obfuscate, falsify documents, spend millions on misleading advertising, attempt to buy off critics or fund massive lobbying of law makers"

If you think the answer is obviously yes, then also please think about the dramatic turn in smoking statistics since it was revealed that the cigarette companies were acting in the same manner.
If it meets the guidelines, this might make a good "Show HN".

Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

Curious if this was built to scratch your own itch.
The Dutch cabinet has already decided to close 8 coal plants - there will only be 3 remaining [1]. Having said that - the power supply gap will now be fed from imports - and critics are claiming that those imports are more carbon intensive. A report has been commissioned...

[1] http://www.nltimes.nl/2016/04/11/dutch-cabinet-to-close-two-...
Outrage is a tool that could do one useful thing - exclude a group of disingenuous people entirely from the discussion.

You have a powerful, organized group that have worked to obstruct discussion on the crucial topic of how to solve this problem for a while. Punishing them harshly would serve the important purpose of preventing their obstruction.

Figuring out how to deal with the climate change problem would be hard if everyone was negotiating in good faith. If we can exclude those who have polluted discussion entirely, so much the better.

And of course the power of individual choice to solve is minimal, rhetoric like "you can do something to stop global warming" is exactly ridiculous greenwashing. Broad state policy is needed. And said policy has to be formulated from enlightened self-interest - sure the solar industry is as self-serving as the oil industry but if we can use their self-interest, so much the better.

Edit: Suppose you had a company with ten divisions. The head of one division pursued a project that made the company a bunch of money but which that head knew would result in the company ultimately loosing even more. When that came to light, would not the sensible thing be to demote the head down to dog catcher and consult with everyone else how to change course? Does this kind of reasoning require that the other divisions head be saints or something? No.
Or, stop using C++
> It never ceases to amaze me how warped and myopic the tech industry's understanding of the world is.

Grandiose slurs like this count as calling names in arguments, which is against the rules here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. There's no content in such a statement, merely indignation and setting yourself above others. That appeals to others who share the same identity sentiment (in this case, anti-"tech industry" as opposed to pro-"tech industry", not that these things mean anything), but it does not add information to a discussion, which is what we're looking for.

The rest of your comment is fine, of course, though not necessarily true—these terms aren't obviously synonymous.
they should serve ad content from their own webservers

I'd love for more sites to do that. Unanimated, non-tracking, same-domain ads are the most acceptable.
What do you mean? I did not downvote anything. That was a good (and expected) question/comment.
I built this in like 2009 or 2010. Super curious how it managed to resurface now.
Outside of the siege of Ft. Pitt (where most seem to consider the attempt ineffective), when else was germ warfare tried in the colonies/USA?
And then starts the crazy hunt for the one thing you need to turn on to make the page work.

I was trying many years ago to create a public DB/wiki telling us which things we need to turn on to get the page to work, but it got abandoned before I really started.
I think this is true, but it's important to understand that there is more to harassment than just missing a few hints.

I'm sure she was annoyed, but that doesn't, by itself, make the situation harassment. He can easily recover now by simply acting polite, pleasant, and professional with her--essentially, acting like it never happened. That's hard, but the right thing to do.

If he retaliated--by treating her badly, talking shit about her to other people, trying to harm her career, etc.--that would be a clear step into harassment land.

Yeah, it feels unfair, but that's life. People get annoyed at each other all the time in a typical workplace, often for reasons that seem unfair. Everyone is still expected to act maturely and professionally.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tutankhamun&t=ffab&iax=1&ia=images

or how about Hathor

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/53f353f4e4b0dbe1ff73ce...
Even if it was official policy, it would have been official policy of the British government. The United States did not exist at the time of the weaponization of smallpox at Fort Pitt. Jeffrey Amherst, the Commander-in-Chief in North America at the time, was never on the colonies' side during the Revolutionary War.
2016 Baseball Opening Day Matchups in Home Prices
I think there's a valid argument to be made that it is at least poorly named, and that naming has resulted in people using it wrong, including among people who teach the language and so compound the problem.
You do understand the probability of the strongest hire in 12 separate rolls of the die being female and asian is absurdly small right?

We are talking thousandths of a percentage point here. The odds of that being a "natural" distribution is absurd.

There are a bunch of places that hire out of whack to the natural distribution of the population.

If one of them mentioned sexual harassment

That's much stronger evidence in combination. But I think it's weird you led with the population distribution in your account, not the reported behavior.
If you are at all into this sort of thing( data centers) and you ever get a chance to go, I strongly recommend it.

The amount of tech in this building is just staggering. As the article hints at, everyone who is everyone in finance has a spot there. This has an effect of the more people who are colocated there, the bigger the draw it becomes for the remaining few who aren't currently colocated there.

In the interconnected world of finance, data center cross connects become very important. Its not unusual for a prop trading firm to have 30 different cross connects to vendors, exchanges and sell side firms.

So I guess its not surprising that there have been companies formed with the sole intention of connecting companies that already exist in teh data center. Radianz and Lucera are mentioned in the article but there are usually a half a dozen in each of the main data centers in the new york and chicago surrounding area. as usual Nanex does a decent job of describing the reason why there are so many data centers and they all are atleast 10 miles apart.

http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/3532.html

Another article from today that talks about the new data center.

https://medium.com/@RobinWigg/wave-a-final-goodbye-to-this-5...